The honoraria issue could not have come at a worse time. People in general, were disgruntled at the way the economy was going. The way it was done was ham-fisted and led to the perception that people were ‘not getting their money’s worth’ as analyses of parliamentary attendance were carried out, first by this newspaper, then by others.

It turned out that a fair amount of MPs were just not putting the hours in, and this led to even more anger from the general public. As always, one cannot generalise; there are MPs on both sides of the House who are almost always present, but there were a great deal of others who either didn’t turn up, or ‘clocked in’ and went home.

Of course, time spent in the parliament building alone, is not a full indication of the work carried out by individual MPs on behalf of their constituents; there are, for example, also parliamentary questions which are made. But overall, the attendance record did nothing to help the perception that the general public does not get ‘value for money’ out of parliament.

But yesterday, at committee stage, we got to see another side of our MPs. Those who are discussing the divorce Bill carried on discussing, clause after sapping clause, till 2am. And this, we feel, having been critical of MPs ourselves, deserves to be pointed out.

The divorce Bill is a matter of huge importance. All sides agreed that while legislation needed to be implemented ‘quickly’, it could not be done at the expense of the quality of the content. To this, they have certainly lived up. The committee meetings begin mid-afternoon, so one can safely assume that MPs talked, reviewed, talked some more and reviewed some more, until the small hours.

This is dedication. This is the respect that we have for our families and this is also respect to the tax payer and the individual voters. This newspaper prides itself in the attitude of calling a spade a spade. We thank those MPs on the committee for the dedication they are showing to providing the best possible law they can, which should hopefully get the final seal of approval in parliament on 25 July.

At the end of the day, there is always going to be the underlying problem, insomuch that our MPs are part-timers. They need to earn a living, this is fact. Various MPs have spoken about the subject, and have said that in making MPs full-timers, one would automatically give the quality of discussion and attendance a boost – with this we agree.

We believe our parliament is to be respected, it is the highest institution in the land and it is our lawmaking body and a defender of rights. But respect is always reciprocal, and it is down to the individual MP to repay the trust of the voter.