Foreign Minister Tonio Borg this evening defended the government's decision to grant ministers their honoraria as MPs, along with the ministerial salary.

Speaking in Parliament, he said that the only purpose of an Opposition motion that was critical of the decision, was political gain. 

He said the people needed to ask whether the government decision was logical.

He recalled that in the last legislature, it was decided that civil servants who became MPs would not lose their salary and would still receive their parliamentary honorarium.

Some government employees could even take their salary and their honoraria, while also continuing private practice.

This principle had, in this legislature, been extended to ministers because they too were public officers who received a salary from the state. Like the other MPs who were also employed by the state, the ministers were now receiving their salary plus the honoraria.

This was the same as, say, in the House of Commons. Being a minister and serving as an MP were two different things, and those holding the two positions were actually sworn in twice.

One had to ask, Dr Borg said, whether ministerial pay, including both the salary and the honoraria, was fair when compared to the public and private sectors.

People did not go into politics for the money, he said. But people should not be discouraged from serving their country because their pay was woefully inadequate when compared to the private sector and even some positions in public corporations.

It was also worth pointing out, Dr Borg said, that ministerial pensions were not affected since pensions were calculated only on the basis of basic salary.

The minister insisted that the raise given to the ministers was never shrouded in secrecy. It was mentioned in the newspapers and was also listed in the annual ministerial declaration of assets. The raise was also mentioned by some MPs in Parliament.

Dr Borg said the decision to raise ministerial pay by giving ministers their honoraria was taken at a time when the economy was doing well.  Furthermore, those who were arguing that ministerial pay should be cut at a time of austerity should remember that countries which had done so had also reduced the salaries of civil servants.

The foreign minister said he agreed that the time had come to consider having a mechanism to oversee public standards in the House of Representatives, on the lines of the House of Commons, the purpose being to ensure that parliament continued to enjoy the confidence of the people.  

The debate continues tomorrow morning.