A shouting match between Opposition MPs Alfred Sant and Karmenu Vella on the one side and Government whip David Agius on the other erupted during yesterday’s parliamentary sitting.

The Government is telling the EU one thing and the people the other. And it is accusing the Opposition of wasting time because it is bringing up these things. It is discarding the opportunity of explaining to the people

It came after Finance Minister Tonio Fenech said the discussion scrutinising the stability and fiscal governance pact was a waste of the House’s time as both sides were repeating themselves.

During the shouting match the Speaker repeatedly threatened to suspend the debate which up to then had been “quite civilised”. He ordered all speakers to address the Chair and concentrate on the issues at hand.

Dr Sant said he could not accept being accused of wasting time because he was pointing out shortcomings in the treaty which affected Malta and which Parliament was obliged to approve. The minister must explain how certain things were to be calculated.

Other parliaments had taken things much more seriously with discussions in several committees. But Malta’s Government should be ashamed of the way it was seeking to curtail discussion on very important commitments without proper discussion. The treaty was seriously limiting the government’s ability to govern.

This was an attack on Parliament’s dignity, and the Government whip should be ashamed to have spoken like that, he said.

On a point of order, Mr Agius denied saying the Opposition was wasting time.

Mr Vella said Mr Agius’s denial was in contempt of the House. He had agreed with Mr Fenech’s charge of the Opposition wasting time, even if he had spoken while his microphone was not on.

Was the Opposition wasting time because it had conceded too much and the Government had come at the eleventh hour after it had accepted the agreement because it was time-bound, and then expected the Opposition to discuss it clause by clause?

The Opposition’s legitimate questions were not being answered because it was not true the Government wanted the debate. That’s what the EU should be told – that the Government was just seeking a rubber stamp.

Dr Sant said Mr Agius was misleading the House when he denied he had agreed that the Opposition was wasting time, even if he had not been heard on the microphone. It was the Government that was wasting time, but the Opposition could not accept this treatment on something so important.

The Finance Minister must explain how the Budget and the deficit were to be measured. At this stage the treaty could neither be voted against nor changed, but the House should have more time to debate it.

Mr Fenech said his answer was simple: the deficit would be measured as per ESA 95, and if Dr Sant did not know what that was, he should do some research.

Mr Vella said the Opposition had the ­­­­­people’s interests at heart. Dr Sant had pointed out the difference between accrual and cash basis. The accrual system at the end of June had shown that the national debt had surpassed the €5 billion mark, but last week’s data for September-October were still showing €4.6 billion.

This was not a difference of one euro but one of €400 million in just four months between June and October. And the government was acting as if nothing had happened.

The Government was telling the EU one thing and the people another. And it was accusing the Opposition of wasting time because it was bringing up these things. It was discarding the opportunity of explaining to the people.

Parliament’s time was being wasted when the Government had been dodging important votes since January.

Mr Fenech said the Government’s ESA 95 accounts were accrual-based, not cash-based. He “refused” to repeat what he had already said.

Shortly after that, Dr Sant left the House and the debate continued between Mr Fenech and Mr Vella.