Writing in The Times, he said the way things were done left a very bad taste in people's mouths as it reeked of subterfuge.

"This left everyone justifiably thinking that there were efforts being made to hide things not only from the public but, which is even more worrying, from the Nationalist Party parliamentary group."

Dr Pullicino Orlando said he was proud to form part of the present parliamentary group.

"Many of us have our differences but we have always found a way forward out of the sometimes difficult situations we were faced with over the past three years. Some of the situations could have been avoided but that is now water under the bridge," he wrote in The Times.

"That is why it saddens me and many of my colleagues that we are usually only consulted as a last resort."

The parliamentary group meeting held last Monday was a case in point, he said. It was called when it became obvious that matters were rapidly getting out of hand. It did, however, end up as being a positive meeting with tangible, sensible decisions taken about an issue that was not easy to discuss: divorce.

"Had the ministerial pay rise issue been tackled in the same way months ago we may have avoided the embarrassment surrounding this issue, which will overshadow the work of this Administration up to the next election."

It was obvious, Dr Pullicino Orlando said,  that the parliamentary group as a whole was more in tune with the public than the Cabinet. Perhaps the ministers were too inundated with their work to find the time to listen.

"They are, by and large, a dedicated group of individuals and I have no doubt that it is actually pressures of the work delegated to them that leads to this state of affairs.

"This is precisely why the whole parliamentary group should be brought on board more regularly."

The Nationalist MP said it was a practically universally accepted fact that the pay rise issue was handled insensitively, arbitrarily and in a way that was flagrantly lacking in transparency. If the opposition motion had stopped at that it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for many of the MPs on the government benches not to vote in favour of the motion without rendering themselves ridiculous. This would not, in any way, have affected the stability of the Administration. There were a number of money Bills coming up in the coming days that would surely be backed by all of the PN group and which were, in essence, votes of confidence in the government.

The opposition motion did, however, go one step further. The references to the Opposition Leader made it come across as appearing that the honourable gentleman was stamping his feet because he was left without the salary hike. It came across as being a protest along the lines of the “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” kind of reasoning.

Dr Pullicino Orlando said he found it hard to subscribe to this line of thought.

That was why he would be voting against the opposition motion with a clear conscience on Saturday.