Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi today proposed in Parliament that the Committee to Strengthen Democracy should be reactivated and it should urgently consider the setting up of a mechanism to decide and monitor the pay of ministers and MPs, on the model of the House of Commons.

His proposal was contained in an amendment to replace an Opposition motion which had condemned the government for having given ministers a raise by granting them the honoraria of MPs along with their ministerial salary.

Nationalist MP Jesmond Mugliett, who had himself raised questions about the issue, seconded Dr Gonzi's motion.

(See Mr Mugliett's statement at http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110611/local/jpo-i-had-intended-to-vote-with-the-opposition.370071 )

Replying to questions by the leader of the Opposition, Dr Gonzi said his proposal did not mean the suspension of the raise given to ministers or a refund of that raise.

Dr Muscat said that while the government and the opposition were having talks to 'repair what was broken' the Opposition would press on with its motion condemning the raise given to the ministers.

The Opposition had walked out of the Committee in the wake of controversy over a vote in the House on the power station extension.

Earlier in today's speech, Dr Gonzi said that if the Opposition wanted to push the clock back on ministers' pay, then, by the same yardstick, the clock would have to be pushed back regarding the pay for all MPs who had other jobs.

Earlier in his speech, Dr Gonzi  said that it was disgraceful for the Opposition to be trying to impression that the government decision to raise ministers' income was taken recently, or that it did not know that the decision was taken in May 2008.

Dr Gonzi said the government had decided, at the time, that ministers should start receiving their parliamentary honorarium, along with their ministerial pay. That was in line with a previous decision that civil servants who were elected to parliament would retain their job and pay, while also receiving their parliamentary honorarium.

If the Opposition now wanted to reverse the decision on ministers' pay, then one would reverse everything, Dr Gonzi said.

No one from the Opposition had protested, for example, when a member within its ranks, upon election, was able to keep his Mepa job, and enjoy increases to that salary, while also receiving the honorarium. This MP, despite being employed by Mepa, criticised the Authority in the House.

There was also a case where an MP who was a government MP, received his government salary and parliamentary honorarium , but did not turn up for work.

These people had received far more than €600 a week thanks to the government decision. Could anyone from the Opposition deny this?

If this decision was good for such MPs who had received such increases as a result, why was it wrong for the ministers? What yardstick did the Opposition use.

What applied for the Opposition MPs, surely, also applied to ministers.

The raise for ministers was part of a package which also provided that the Leader of the Opposition and the Speaker should be given a choice. If they wished to serve full time (without private practice or other jobs) they would be treated like the ministers and be given a salary for the post, and the honoraria of MPs. What was wrong with this?

This method was adopted for Speaker Louis Galea, who opted to serve full time and started receiving a Speaker's salary and an honorarium. The present Speaker opted not to serve full time.

Dr Gonzi said that despite the raise given to the ministers, they still lost substantial income when they gave up their profession to become ministers and service the country. That they were now being given their honorarium along with their salary was only partial compensation.

This was something which was done in most parliaments abroad. What was wrong with this?

Dr Gonzi insisted that the government decision was not hidden. It was documented, and the government was even criticised in the media for it.

The Prime Minister regretted that in the wake of this controversy, the government and the opposition had not been able to reach agreement, within the Parliamentary Committee on Democracy. But the opposition MPs had walked out of this committee. They were now realising they had taken a bad decision.

In January he had declared that the revision of MP's honoraria would be referred to a House committee. Since then, unfortunately, no progress had been made. He had not given up, however.

He had noted recent comments by the Leader of the Opposition indicating that the Opposition wanted the Committee on Democracy to be revived.

He was therefore proposing that, without going into the merits of what had taken place, the Speaker would be asked to convene a meeting of the select committee, picking up the previous agenda and the issue over MPs' honoraria. Should the committee decide to set up a sub-commission, he would have no objection.

The committee could decide to adopt the model of the House of Commons on pay for ministers and MPs and how salaries were reviewed, Dr Gonzi said.

Alternatively, he said he would be prepared to consider other suggestions.

Asked by Joseph Muscat whether he was proposing that ministers would refund their increase in the meantime, Dr Gonzi said he was not proposing that. What he was proposing was that the committee could consider whether to adopt the House of Commons mechanism and oversight system.

MUSCAT REACTION

Dr Muscat said talks were being held 'in a way to repair what had been broken'. Those talks should continue to take their course and whoever suffered should be compensated.

As for Dr Gonzi's suggestion, which did not mean the suspension of the ministers' salary increase, the Opposition would press on with its motion.

GOVERNMENT AMENDMENT

At the end of his speech Dr Gonzi moved an amendment deleting the Opposition Motion and referring the issue of ministers' and MPs pay to the House Committee on Democracy to consider whether the House of Commons model could be adopted for this issue.

The amendment was seconded by Jesmond Mugliett.