The Speaker’s Office is insisting that the use of the MPs’ free postal allowance is at their discretion, even after he was confronted about a case of unsolicited birthday cards.
Questions on this perk enjoyed by all Members of Parliament were raised by a Times of Malta reader who received unsolicited mail in the form of a birthday card signed by Labour MP Silvio Schembri. The correspondence was delivered in an official envelope bearing the emblem of the House of Representatives.
The recipient, who preferred to remain anonymous, took umbrage at the fact that her personal details were used without consent and questioned if the MPs’ postal allowance was being misused.
Asked for his reaction, the Speaker’s Office, through the Clerk of the House, Ray Scicluna, confirmed that MPs were entitled to 100 franked envelopes per week as a form of financial support to fulfil their mandate to communicate with constituents.
The details are publicly available, but the individual may send me a request to stop receiving mail
Moreover, Mr Scicluna told this newspaper that discussions were being held on the possibility of giving MPs the option to “upgrade” their current €30 monthly internet allowance by using part of the postage grant. The option was being considered since an increasing number of constituents prefer communicating online, he noted.
“In both cases the Office of the Speaker has always adopted the stance of trusting the MPs discretion on the use of such facilities,” Mr Scicluna said.
On his part, the Labour MP Silvio Schembri denied any wrongdoing.
“Details were obtained from the electoral register, which is publicly available from the Electoral Office, but the individual may send me a request to stop receiving mail,” he said.
Nevertheless, this newspaper sought the advice of the Data Protection Office on the implications of this form of unsolicited mail.
While not pronouncing itself on this case in particular, saying it could not just comment on “allegations”, it noted that by law MPs were allowed to refer to the electoral register to communicate with voters. However, any person shall have the right to object at any time to the processing of their personal data for such purposes, he added.
In its reply, the office said that prior to reaching any conclusions on this case, a number of considerations had to be made, such as determining if certain personal data was already available in the public domain or if the MP was on the recipient’s friends list on social media.
Pressed for a reply, the Data Protection Office urged the recipient to submit her evidence and lodge a formal complaint with it against the MP in question, so an investigation could be launched.
