On July 16 of last year the Prime Minister made a very important statement about, among other things, the strengthening of democracy in Malta, something the Leader of the Opposition also had on his agenda. Hence it was possible to record rare unanimous agreement in the House of Representatives on a particular course of action. It is worth recalling what Lawrence Gonzi said and what took place.

The Prime Minister referred to the President's Speech when the 11th legislature opened. Reading out the government's programme the President bullet-pointed the following as targets to be met:

• Strengthening of democracy and transparency by boosting Parliament and giving it additional resources;

• Strengthening the Permanent Commission Against Corruption by, among other things, enacting a law about a special investigator within the commission;

• Strengthening the institution of the Ombudsman by giving it responsibility to coordinate processes on complaints about the administration of the public sector;

• Proposing a law about the financing of political parties;

• Proposing that, in the context of revising the Constitution, a law is enacted to strengthen the electoral system;

• Proposing an Act to strengthen control of conflicts of interest of MPs, including a legislative proposal for Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries to put in a Blind Trust their commercial interests and non-fixed/public investments.

The Prime Minister's resolution recalled that proposals had been made to strengthen Parliament through regulations on the appointment of the Speaker, deputy Speaker and chairmen of committees, pairing, Prime Minister's question time, the time of parliamentary sittings, the House quorum and an increase in the resources available to the parliamentary groups. Furthermore, the resolution referred to agreement that public broadcasting should be discussed in a manner that also included better regulation and a more effective political broadcasting, including what should be the parties' role in the local media.

Because, said the Prime Minister, the House agreed that all the above was in the national interest and so, wherever possible, there should be consensus between the two sides, the House of Representatives resolved to set up a Select Committee to make recommendations on all the issues listed in the resolution.

The Select Committee was to be presided over by the Speaker or, in his absence, the deputy Speaker. A timeline was efficiently set - the committee was enjoined to report back to the House by October 31, 2008.

Government and opposition had obviously discussed the matter and agreed upon it before the resolution was put to the House. The Prime Minister, therefore, was able to say who the members would be. On the government's side they are Foreign Minister Tonio Borg, Transport Minister Austin Gatt and Francis Zammit Dimech. Michael Frendo and new MPs Beppe Fenech Adami and Charlo' Bonnici were to act as substitutes for the government's three nominees when necessary.

The members appointed to represent the opposition were Evarist Bartolo and George Vella, and Michael Falzon. Their nominated substitutes are Labour deputy leader Anglu Farrugia and former ministers Charles Mangion and Karmenu Vella.

The Prime Minister's motion was seconded by Farrugia, a further sign of the rare consensus achieved to move it. It passed without anybody voting against it.

All so fine and dandy. So uplifting. A breath of fresh air in a House continually clouded by raucous division. Good, understandable objectives. A weighty Select Committee to see them through. What more could the good citizenry, heartily fed up with continuous infighting in the highest institution in the land, ask for?

It could ask for one little obvious thing - results. None were forthcoming. For whatever reason and with either side blaming the other, government and opposition rapidly lost the goodwill that underpinned the setting up of the Select Committee. They soon reverted to going at each other hammer and thongs.

So, what of the Select Committee? Well, I'm told it still exists. But it barely ever meets nowadays. So much for the main objective, to strengthen the way our democracy works. So much for good intention.

We cannot kid ourselves and expect the two sides in the House to operate by consensus. That is not achievable. Consensus on key issues of national interest, like health, education and foreign relations is desirable and to a considerable extent possible. Yet the clash and contrast of competing ideas would be lost if consensus were to become the normal state of affairs. The two sides have different roles.

The government, in addition to its political role, also heads the executive. The opposition, in addition to being the alternative government in waiting, has the duty to watchdog the government, to challenge it and demand satisfaction for its every action, and to come up with its own competing proposals.

Nevertheless, the clash and contrast rule need not be as absolute as it is in Malta. Some of the points set out in the Prime Minister's resolution, seconded by the deputy leader of the opposition and passed without anyone being against, deserve focused attention by the Select Committee.

Yet the rot seems to have set in too deeply once again. The only hope left, I would venture to think out aloud, is for Speaker Louis Galea to use his office and skills to get the committee meeting again. It is not only that its members owe to the House of Representatives.

They owe it to the rest of us.