As Parliament prepares to migrate to a new building at City Gate, Valletta, Speaker Anġlu Farrugia has tabled a report aimed to assure the administrative autonomy of Malta’s highest institution. Drawn up by an internal commission, it builds upon proposals made in a previous report commissioned in 2005 and a white paper published in 2012.

Successive speakers of the House have been clamouring for a more autonomous Parliament. In his recent speech to mark Sette Giugno, Dr Farrugia stressed the need to move from words to action and achieve that “quantum leap”. Statements made by MPs on both sides of the House have supported the principle of administrative autonomy, so there is ground for optimism that the proposals will finally come to fruition.

The commission reports that, to date, Parliament has always been treated like any other government department. Its employees are all public sector workers, which contrasts starkly with the staffing procedures of two independent officers of Parliament, the Ombudsman and the Auditor General, who manage their own staffing and recruitment.

A second aspect that impinges upon Parliament’s autonomy is its budget. Parliament depends on the executive to approve any request for resources, again in contrast with the Ombudsman and the Auditor General. The principle of the separation of powers between the legislative and the executive is “anomalous, if not bizarre”, the commission says.

It is proposing a Parliamentary Service Act to address the anomalies. It based its proposals on the organisational set-up of the National Audit Office to ensure Parliament functions effectively, efficiently, independently and autonomously.

But there are other proposals that go beyond budget and personnel. The commission is also proposing a constitutional amendment so that when there is no Acting President, the Speaker would be appointed ex lege. As things stand today, the Constitution allows the Chief Justice to assume such a role.

Recognising that administrative autonomy would have to mean Parliament is more accountable to the public, the commission recommends that one way to ensure such public scrutiny is through a parliamentary TV channel. There is no logical link between the two because live broadcasts will not necessarily serve to show “funds are effectively and efficiently spent”. Cynics could even say it may have the opposite effect.

Any move towards increasing public accessibility to events inside Parliament should be welcomed as this too is part of the democratic process.

The commission is also proposing adequate and unbiased research and information facilities for MPs, which should lead to better and more informed parliamentary debates.

The separation of the legislative from the executive is a fundamental principle of democracy. The proposals draw on the experience and existing structures in mature democracies. Though only symbolic, the transfer of Parliament to “its own building” may be the opportune moment to make the necessary changes to ensure Parliament’s autonomy.

It is hoped that an independent and autonomous Parliament, in control of its budget and adequately staffed with professional staff separate from the main civil service, would ensure better efficiency and planning. More importantly, the proposed changes should strengthen the role of Parliament in its two principal functions: passing legislation and, above all, scrutinising the executive.

Only a healthy relationship between Parliament and the executive that recognises their distinct roles would ensure the continued and dynamic development of democracy and its institutions in Malta.