Speaker of the House Carmelo Abela stressed the need for people to understand the Parliamentary workload when discussing whether Malta has too many Members of Parliament, but said he is "open to a discussion".

The Speaker, while not having any control over Parliamentary numbers, was asked for his personal opinion on the topic during an interview with WhosWho.mt.

Over the years the issue of the number of Members of Parliament has arisen in the public sphere. The Malta Chamber of Commerce, for instance, had suggested reforms which included downsizing the number of MPs to 45.

He said that when comparing Malta to other countries, then one could reach the conclusion that Malta has far more MPs when compared to the size of its electorate.

“That statistic could also be applied to the number of police, where if you compare the number of police officers in Malta and how many there are in other countries to their respective populations, then there will be people who argue that even the size of the police force is a lot.”

He suspects that a number of people, and even possibly some of the constituted bodies, don’t understand Parliament’s work enough. “It could be our failing for not explaining enough. If there was a proposal for Parliament to be made up of 45 MPs, does that also include MPs serving in the Executive?” he asked.

“I think the Malta Chamber of Commerce's report also gives the possibility of technocrats being part of Government, with there being a restricted number which the Prime Minister can select to be part of the executive who are not MPs,” he said.

But there is a lot of work in Parliament itself, he said, mentioning that there are 17 permanent committees which MPs from both parties sit on as an example.

“The numbers are what they are. Our Parliament, with 79, 65 or 45 MPs, must do the work of a Parliament that has 300 members, 600 members. So one needs to be careful that we understand exactly what Parliament's work is, as at the end of the day, the work of MPs must be done – going on delegations abroad, working in the permanent committees, in their Parliamentary contribution etc.”

He said he doesn't have a particular number of MPs in mind. Taking 65 MPs as an example, he said a number would be in the Executive, and so the work would fall on the Government's backbench to conduct Parliamentary work.

“I'm open to a discussion, but it is also important to understand what the work carried out in Parliament is.”

Asked whether the gender corrective mechanism should remain in place, and whether he believes it is working, the Speaker said that in an ideal world it wouldn't exist as it would mean that there would be enough male and female candidates being elected equally.

In the last election, he said, "I think the mechanism worked better than it did in the first election it was used."

He said that there were women who were candidates and MPs in the last legislature who improved their performance in this election, he said, adding that there might have also been some female candidates who felt more comfortable to contest with the mechanism in place.

The aim of the mechanism was to get closer to 40% of MPs being of the under-represented sex, he said. "This time, we got closer," he said.

The gender mechanism has an expiry date according to the law, he adds. "One hopes that after the expiry date we won't need it because more women candidates would contest and the electorate would start choosing more women."

According to the law, the mechanism is to last for 20 years since its implementation.

"You are always going to find something to criticise, but we must keep in mind that we spent years talking about the need of more female representation, and so something had to be done."

"When you see it working, every now and again, you say that a person who received a few votes found her place in Parliament? Numbers could be a bit problematic in this sense, but the scope is to increase the female representation in Parliament."

Asked for his opinion on full-time MPs in Parliament, he underlined that the needs of Parliament must be met.

"My personal opinion was never that we should immediately go for full-time MPs. I think we need to possibly slowly start moving towards it."

He said that there are different opinions on the topic. "To have another job helps you be more hands-on and better understand. If I'm a worker and speak in Parliament, I will be speaking from my experience and from the experience of my work colleagues also as I did not cut off from the workplace."

He feels that such experience helped him when he would debate in Parliament as an MP.

There are MPs who might not want to be full-time MPs, he added, explaining that it might keep away people who could be political candidates.

Talking about a possible hybrid system, he said that if there are those who want to be full-time MPs, "then perhaps we should move towards it," he said. "But certainly, for example, we try to move towards ensuring that one has a bit of assistance. Whether you are part-time or would be full-time MP, MPs do not have the support one expects them to have," he said, aside from those who form part of the Executive.

Regarding wages, he said that presently MPs receive an honoraria, "which is not a salary."

"We have been like this for years. If the country were to move towards full-time MPs, all that has to change, from the salaries of the Prime Minister down, and also MPs."

He said that introducing full-time MPs is easier said than done. He is also sceptical of their being a jump to full-time MPs without something transitional. There would be some who will question having 79 MPs, he mentioned.

"Its not an easy yes or no, there is work in the middle. In my opinion is that in such a case, we should move closer to it with a certain transition, maybe increasing support for MPs or giving options to be full-time should they wish."