Joseph Muscat said he had no problem removing MPs from the planning board but four months and a general election later he has changed tack.

It gives the impression it is creating jobs for the boys and girls, and turns boards into a mere extension of the government machinery

Standing in front of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority offices on January 30, then Opposition leader Dr Muscat said the Labour Party had no objection to withdrawing party representatives if elected and the other party agreed.

Although the commitment did not form part of the Labour manifesto, Dr Muscat’s statement was made in the thick of an election campaign.

But as Prime Minister, not only are the MPs on the planning board still in place, but Dr Muscat is piloting a law that will allow MPs to be nominated to more boards and agencies.

Martin Scicluna, chairman of the Today Public Policy Institute, believes the Prime Minister’s motivation is to avoid ending up like his predecessor with a restless and dissatisfied backbench.

“If Muscat wanted to involve them it would have been far better if he chose the parliamentary route and set up proper and effective parliamentary committees to involve them,” Mr Scicluna said.

In the last legislature, the Government took a similar route when it created the executive roles of parliamentary assistants and also appointed one of its MPs to chair the Malta Council for Science and Technology.

Now in opposition, the Nationalist Party has criticised the Government’s plans as blurring the distinction between the legislative and executive arms.

The criticism may sound hollow given the PN’s track record in government but Mr Scicluna concurs that in principle it is wrong to have MPs on government boards.

“It blurs the line between the legislative and the executive, gives the impression it is creating jobs for the boys and girls, and turns boards into a mere extension of the government machinery,” he said, adding that the institute he chaired had in the past criticised the presence of MPs on the Mepa board.

Mr Scicluna said boards should fulfil their mandate in an objective and independent way, which can be undermined by the presence of MPs.

“The bottom line is will this move add to the efficiency and effectiveness of the Government?

“On balance I doubt it will lead to this,” he added.

George Vital Zammit, a lecturer in public policy at the University of Malta, believes there are two sides to the proposed legislation.

The presence of elected representatives on government boards may increase the level of oversight but it can also fuel greater political intrusion, he argued.

“An MP may give the entity he sits on more clout because his presence will increase the public’s expectation of what the board must deliver,” he said, adding MPs, unlike unknown board members, are accountable to the people who elect them.

However, Dr Zammit was also wary of political intrusion, which was “very pervasive” even in authorities that are supposed to be independent of the Government.

“Various studies have shown we already have agencies and authorities that are not as independent as they should be and where political intrusion is very high.

“I would rather keep the political class to take decisions and allow others to implement them.”

Dr Zammit insisted the effectiveness of the proposed legislation will also be determined by the criteria used to select the MPs.

In Parliament on Monday, Dr Muscat defended his stand by saying the appointment of MPs to State boards was a better way of using their services, rather than appointing parliamentary assistants with a vague role.

However, Dr Muscat has avoided answering direct questions about the subject.

Questions sent by Times of Malta on Monday and Tuesday remained unanswered yesterday.