Parliament is one of the State's highest constitutional institutions. As the supreme legislative authority, it embodies the sovereignty of the people and stands at the heart of representative democracy. Its principal functions are to enact, amend and repeal laws, while holding the Executive accountable for the exercise of public power.

A democratic system of government is founded on the separation of powers, with authority distributed among three distinct but interdependent branches that provide the necessary checks and balances:

• The Legislature (Parliament): Debates, scrutinises and enacts legislation while overseeing the work of the Executive.
• The Executive: Led by the Prime Minister and composed of ministers and parliamentary secretaries responsible for implementing laws passed by Parliament and administering the affairs of the State.
• The Judiciary: An independent system of courts entrusted with interpreting and applying the law while ensuring that legislation and executive action comply with the Constitution.

These constitutional principles lose much of their practical value when the Executive neglects one of its most basic constitutional obligations: answering parliamentary questions.

Figures recently disclosed by Speaker Carmelo Abela illustrate the extent of the problem. During the 14th Legislature, more than 1,000 parliamentary questions remained unanswered. Between 2022 and 2026, Members of Parliament tabled 36,054 parliamentary questions, of which around 1,200 received no substantive reply.

The statistics were published in response to a parliamentary question submitted by Nationalist MP Michael Piccinino, who requested information on the number of parliamentary questions that remained unanswered by the dissolution of Parliament - which occurred a year before the legislature's scheduled expiry - or had received only standard holding replies such as, "The answer will be given in another sitting" or "The information is still being gathered."

Recent examples demonstrate that this is not an isolated problem.

The Government recently declined to disclose how many young people had surrendered their driving licence in exchange for the €25,000 incentive offered under its traffic reduction scheme. Replying to a parliamentary question by Nationalist MP Bernice Bonello, the Minister for Sustainable Mobility merely stated that the information would be provided during a future parliamentary sitting. If the scheme has failed to achieve its stated objective of reducing traffic congestion, the Government should acknowledge this openly instead of postponing the release of basic information.

Bonello's question was straightforward. She simply requested the number of young men and women who had applied for the scheme. It involved neither politically sensitive information nor an onerous administrative exercise. It deserved a clear and timely answer.

The same minister also failed to disclose how many new applications for berths had been submitted during February, March, April and May 2026 - the months leading up to the recent election. In response to a parliamentary question by Nationalist MP Adrian Delia, the Minister once again resorted to the standard formula that the answer would be provided at a future parliamentary sitting.

Parliamentary questions are among the Opposition's most effective constitutional tools for scrutinising the Executive. Ministers and parliamentary secretaries have a duty to provide accurate, timely and substantive replies to properly tabled questions. Through this mechanism, the Opposition examines government decisions, obtains information in the public interest and promotes transparency and accountability in public administration.

Supported by an experienced civil service and professional advisers, ministers cannot evade either their individual or collective responsibility for good governance. When parliamentary questions remain unanswered, Parliament's scrutiny is weakened, ministerial accountability is diminished and public confidence in democratic institutions is undermined.

Although the Speaker's powers to sanction ministers who fail to reply are limited, the Opposition cannot allow this persistent disregard for parliamentary scrutiny to pass unnoticed. Every unanswered parliamentary question should be highlighted publicly. A systematic effort should be made to document and expose those ministers and parliamentary secretaries who repeatedly fail to fulfil their parliamentary obligations, enabling citizens to judge whether their elected representatives are meeting the standards of transparency and accountability expected in a democratic society.

This requires sustained political communication. The Opposition's work inside Parliament must be reinforced by a coordinated campaign outside it through social media, party media platforms and regular press statements explaining not only the issues being raised but also the Government's refusal or failure to answer legitimate parliamentary questions.

The questions submitted by the Opposition frequently concern matters that directly affect citizens, businesses and entire sectors of society. Ministers and parliamentary secretaries therefore have a responsibility to provide comprehensive and meaningful replies. Anything less short-changes the public and reflects negligence, administrative inefficiency or a lack of respect for Parliament. Regrettably, many citizens have become accustomed to this standard of governance.

This should serve as an important reminder that the Opposition must, from the outset of this legislature, demonstrate credibility, integrity and political maturity. Effective parliamentary scrutiny is not merely a constitutional duty; it is essential to earning public trust and presenting a credible alternative government.

The Opposition should therefore consistently expose, through both its parliamentary work and its public communications, those members of the Government who repeatedly fail to discharge their responsibilities diligently. Only then will the public increasingly recognise that the humility and accountability expected of public office have, in too many instances, been replaced by arrogance, complacency and an alarming disregard for Parliament itself.

Gejtu Vella - People & Industrial Relations Consultant