There is no reason why the political leaders should not be civil to each other, disagree though they will about policy, tactics, strategy and style. Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and Opposition Leader Simon Busuttil demonstrated that intent by visiting each other’s headquarters, checking the respective views from their windows, sharing smiles and all but patting each other on the back.

Despite the smiles and the shared jokes, opposing stances are all in a day’s work

Good going, but do not be fooled. The leaders and all have every intention to go at each other hammer and thongs. They have already started doing that. It cannot be otherwise.

The duty of the opposition is to oppose, defining that to hold the government to account. There are areas where there should and could be consensus, like foreign policy, now that the commitment to neutrality and the EU is shared, education and financial services, and creating employment.

Yet, even there, the Opposition will criticise and seek to differentiate itself from the Government to demonstrate its credentials as the alternative government.

Despite the smiles and the shared jokes, opposing stances are all in a day’s work. Even so, there should be limits, and the Nationalist Opposition is exceeding them already.

I am not referring to red lines which Busuttil understandably promised to draw. Simple to matters carried forward from the Nationalist’s 15 years in office are glaring examples.

None more so than in the fiscal sector. The Nationalist government had been getting its forecasts and predictions of the structural deficit wrong for years. The reasons were various, but mostly so because the Finance Minister insisted on presenting massaged figures for revenue and expenditure.

We finally have it from the mouth of the European Commission too that revenue forecasts included items of a non-sustainable nature. Those of who focus on that part of the local scene have been saying so for years. The EU spokespersons are saying it now that the Nationalists are out of office. Better late than never,

They are also saying that Nationalist promises to contain government employment were not kept, so they – the EU ladies and gentlemen – will not believe the Labour Government if it says the same thing.

But I digress. My point is what the Nationalists are saying. Wonder of wonders, they are blaming Labour because the budget deficit for 2012 turned out to be as much as a third higher, as a proportion of Gross Domestic Credit, than Tonio Fenech confidently forecast.

Had the Nationalists won the election, he would have had to admit that. Instead, he is now blaming Labour for what happened under his watch.

He and the rest of the Opposition are doing the same thing regarding this year’s Budget. It is the same as drafted and presented to Parliament by ex-minister Fenech. Except for two relatively minor items – the cost of collective agreements concluded by the Nationalists on the eve of the general election and the increased cost of government because of the larger Cabinet created by Muscat.

In effect, the Nationalists are denying themselves, feeding the public the tale that they are not responsible for what the Labour government says and proves it inherited from them.

That hardly falls outside the red line Busuttil said he would be drawing. It represents outright dishonesty.

The reality take when governments change is that for the first six to 12 months, the new government has neither credit nor fault for what takes place. It is all coming through the pipeline fed by the previous government. If the two sides cannot agree on that, then the smiling and jokes were all false, intended to misguide the suffering public.

One strange point of disagreement concerns the pay increases the Nationalist ministers gave themselves shortly after they were elected in 2008. There was public outcry against the move when it finally came to light. So much so that, eventually, the Prime Minister reversed the decision and said that the extra pay and allowances would be paid back.

Were the extra amounts in fact paid back? The Nationalists say yes. Labour says no. The difference in position dominated the news leading to this weekend, with accusations of lying flying about with ease. It is all water under the bridge now, but it is important for the truth to be told.

Truth from the mouths of politicians should still happen sometimes. There is an easy way to establish it.

A simple table should be drawn up showing the salary and allowances the Nationalist Cabinet kicked off with in 2008. It should then show how much increases arbitrarily dished out by the Prime Minister and the resulting salaries and allowances.

The difference is what should have been paid back by ministers and parliamentary secretaries. Was it in fact paid back so that salaries and allowances went back to the 2008 level?

If yes, Labour owes the Nationalist former ministers and parliamentary secretaries an apology. If not, the former Nationalist ministers and parliamentary secretaries owe the people an apology, and still owe the Exchequer some repayments.

The last bit of information which should be included in the statement I am suggesting is the salaries and allowances the present ministers and parliamentary secretaries are receiving, adjusted for cost-of-living increases since 2008. If they are exactly what the Nationalist bigwigs started off with, the case is clearer. If not, further explanation is required.

To my mind, I would draw a close to this sad affair, stick to the 2008 salaries and move on. With all the smiles and jokes of the visits exchanged by our parliamentarians, that should not be impossible. Or should it?