The wretched among Maltese workers who have to subsist on the minimum wage should not hold their breath in the hope that the recommendation by Caritas to up it from €158.11 to €180 per week will be implemented soon. Action has to be taken by the government of the day and already it seems that neither the sitting Nationalist government nor the Labour government-in-waiting intend to make haste to do it.

The Caritas proposal, one of several in a very professional report that drew up a basic budget for a decent living, is by no means revolutionary. The research team who drew it up were careful also to propose a firewall so that raising the minimum wage would not have a multiple effect on the economy or the government finances. They say that wages and social services should not rise for a determined period because of an increase in the minimum wage as recommended.

The majority political class as represented by the main political parties was quick to react as were organisations representing employers.

The Prime Minister invited Caritas to give a presentation at today’s Cabinet meeting (it is standard for the Cabinet to meet on a Monday). That is in line with the updated policy of keeping in touch with the people.

It is unlikely that anything soon will come out of the meeting. For, it is not the presentation that counts. Caritas will be unable this morning to add anything to what is in the report, already well knitted together in the executive summary for those who do not make time enough to read the whole thing.

But, even before the Prime Minister made his invitation, Minister Chris Said had already shown what the government line would be.

He carefully adumbrated the social benefits which those on the minimum wage are entitled to. Dr Said comes across well and is no doubt well-intended. Yet, what he explained at length had already been taken into account by the Caritas research team. They make that very clear, otherwise the recommended minimum wage would have been quite higher.

If anything, the early reaction by the Labour opposition was even less welcome. A party spokesman told The Times (March 22) that Labour “naturally views the idea of raising the minimum wage positively”. But, he added, such action would have to be preceded by a series of other measures. The priority of a new Labour Administration would be to cut costs for families and the private sector.

“That is why,” said the spokesman, “we consider our pledge to reduce electricity bills to be a policy of major economic and social importance.”

There are visible holes in this argument. As I see it, the only way electricity tariffs might be cut without introducing fresh subsidies is through potential technological innovation and production and distribution efficiencies. These will not happen overnight. In the meantime, the cost of living has risen and will continue to rise. The wretched workers subsisting on the minimum wage, and others in similar plight, will find it still harder to exist, let alone live decently.

The least I expect from the political parties, especially the Labour Party, is that they will commit to review the minimum wage within three months of the general election. The impact will have to be assessed, which will not be difficult. Nevertheless, the wretched of our bit of earth have to be offered hope, not least because the minimum wage has not been revised, relative to other employment income, since its introduction 40 years ago.

The employers’ side came down heavily on the Caritas proposal. The director-general of the Chamber for Small and Medium Enterpises – GRTU said that what was proposed was a social, not an economic measure and should be borne by the government. The president of the Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry came up with the platitude that “we need to think more about wealth generation before we can even start wealth redistribution”.

As regularly as the beat of the heart, we hear the government saying that the economy is growing, even faster than various others in the EU. That means wealth is being generated, otherwise employers would have countered the Administration’s claim.

It is remarkable that, even a carefully ring-fenced proposal to raise the standard of living of the neediest in employment has not elicited recognition, both social and economic, that the revision is doable.

Caritas will have to add sincere prayer to its professionalism if there is to be a sensible change of heart.