Several questions remain unanswered after an eight-month investigation by the Auditor General into the way ministers gave themselves a hefty and secretive pay rise in 2008.

The Auditor General labelled the “incorrect” implementation of the Cabinet decision “a good example of bad practice”, which he attributed mostly to a lack of clear instructions.

The inquiry found no evidence of illegal misappropriation of public funds but attempted to explain the complex procedure used to make the increases unnoticeable in the Budget votes.

The Labour Party yesterday said it was awaiting an official announcement from the Cabinet Office following the Auditor General’s report.

Asked whether it would demand the Opposition Leader’s full salary or take other action, a Labour spokesman said: “We leave all options open.

“The report confirms without doubt how the Prime Minister hid the scandalous increase of his and his ministers’ salary by €500-a-week,” the Labour Party said.

The government is again refusing to give clear answers to questions by The Times in light of the Auditor General’s report. (See questions below.) However, it highlighted the fact that the Auditor General found no evidence of misappropriation of funds.

Reacting to this point, the Labour Party recalled that opposition Whip Joe Mizzi had called the Cabinet’s behaviour illegal dishonesty and the Auditor had basically concluded there was “legal dishonesty”. The issue dates back to May 2008, when the newly-elected Cabinet decided to restructure the pay packets of political holders in several ways.

Firstly, the Prime Minister, ministers, parliamentary secretaries, the Opposition Leader and Speaker would start receiving an MP’s honorarium too. This would be increased across the board from €19,100 to €26,700.

Those roles would also receive an increase in their basic pay and a €6,000 increase to their duty allowance.

In all, they were set to receive an increase of more than €600 a week. The changes were immediately implemented for the Prime Minister, ministers and parliamentary secretaries. Eventually, the same was applied to former Speaker Louis Galea.

However, MPs kept being paid the old honoraria and the Opposition Leader retained his original pay packet.

It was only at the end of last year that Finance Minister Tonio Fenech said in Parliament that MPs were to get a rise, causing a public outcry since this was a time when the people were being asked to make sacrifices. Several Nationalist MPs, particularly Jean-Pierre Farrugia, criticised the rise, calling the matter “an unprecedented mess”.

Eventually, the Prime Minister accepted to postpone any changes to the honoraria and asked his Cabinet to refund the difference they had been receiving. However, they were allowed to keep the lowered honorarium.

The Times later revealed that the Cabinet also received a €6,000 increase in duty allowance and that Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat had been denied all increases, as had Speaker Michael Frendo.

What we want to know about ministers’ pay

1. Why weren’t the salary increases communicated to the taxpayers or to Parliament?

2. Why were the honoraria of ministers and parliamentary secretaries paid through their ministries rather than through Parliament?

3. Why did each ministry hide the pay rises in various “allowance” funds rather than include them in the budget line for salaries?

4. Why did the ministries each use different systems of reporting the increase in the Budget rather than one uniform and transparent method?

5. Why were the increases implemented for members of Cabinet but not for the Speaker or the Opposition Leader?

6. What prompted Speaker Louis Galea to eventually start receiving the increases “at a later stage”? Did he find out about them and demand his share?

7. When Michael Frendo replaced Dr Galea, why was he placed on the old system not the new one?

8. Why did Cabinet decide not to give the Opposition Leader his share until concluding other decisions? Was his salary going to be used as a bargaining chip?

9. Why did the Prime Minister claim Dr Muscat was never entitled to an honorarium because he is not a government employee when the Cabinet had discussed the matter and decided his pay would remain in line with those of ministers?

10. What is being done to fix the “incorrect” implementation now? When will ministers and parliamentary secretaries start being paid their honoraria through parliamentary votes rather than through their ministries?

11. Will the salaries of the Opposition Leader and the Speaker be brought in line with the rest of the salaries?

12. Who was responsible for the poor implementation of the Cabinet decision and will any action be taken against the people responsible?