The start of the average plenary session in Parliament is heralded by a 30-minute timeslot dedicated to Parliamentary Questions (PQs). During this half-hour, government ministers are put on the spot and face questions from any MP within the House.

They will start by answering a question which was put to them in writing - but then any MP may ask a supplementary question. Parliamentary practice stipulates that this supplementary question is related to the original question - but in practical terms, this isn't really followed. 

Perhaps that's for the better: it allows any MP to ask any minister on whatever subject may be the flavour of the moment. Parliamentary Question time is in fact pretty much the only point where an MP can hold government ministers to account by questioning them directly.

This why PQs are such an essential part of Malta's parliamentary democracy. Yet during coverage of Parliament we frequently come across PQs which go unanswered. 

For instance, from the March 2022 election up to the end of 2023, there were 750 PQs which were not answered by Prime Minister Robert Abela and his 18 ministers at the time.

This is a point which Opposition MPs have sought rulings from Speaker Anglu Farrugia on countless times.

Most recently, PN MP Ryan Callus requested a ruling on Monday, stating that Minister Clifton Grima has repeatedly failed to answer his parliamentary questions within an appropriate timeframe. His PQ had been asked on five separate occasions yet each time the Education Minister had failed to answer.

The Speaker called on Grima to answer in a timely manner and stressed the importance that the Parliamentary Chamber holds as a forum of public scrutiny via parliamentary questions.

His ruling was very similar to another one the week before - where he handled a complaint from PN MP Rebekah Borg, who said that she had asked the same five questions with regards to the International School in Mtarfa eight times, yet the Minister has failed to provide a reply.

There have been plenty of other similar issues in the past: for example, PN MP Alex Borg had sought a ruling after Foreign Affairs Minister Ian Borg failed, on four occasions, to respond to a PQ which sought a list of all individuals who had been issued a Maltese diplomatic passport over the past decade.

It was in this ruling, which was last October in the first plenary after the summer break, that the Speaker called for a "serious debate" on the procedures governing PQs, highlighting that there are currently no regulations granting the Speaker the power to intervene in the quality of responses to PQs or indeed to met out consequences if a PQ goes unanswered.

In the ruling he suggested a solution from Canada, where a regulation was introduced stipulating that if a PQ is not answered within 25 calendar days, it is automatically referred to a dedicated Standing Committee.

But such a solution - or any solution - can only come by adjusting Malta's parliamentary standing orders; and that's something that can only be done by both the PN and the PL.

With little faith that there is much spirit of collaboration between the two parties right now, a more realistic hope would be for government ministers to show more respect to the PQ process as a whole, and exhibit the transparency and accountability that befits both Parliament and the democratic system which elects it.