Imagine being asked to write an essay, analyse its arguments and criticise its contents, only to be told what the subject is after you have handed it in. It would be a ridiculous exercise, devoid of any academic purpose.

In Parliament, however, this is apparently considered an acceptable way of conducting a budget debate.

The Opposition's role is not to provide a ceremonial response to government announcements. It is there to scrutinise public expenditure, challenge policy decisions and hold ministers accountable. For this to happen, it must have access to the information necessary to do its job. Without it, parliamentary scrutiny becomes little more than an exercise in guesswork.

The fact that Finance Minister Clyde Caruana's Budget 2027 speech was shorter than those delivered in previous years is, in itself, welcome. Budget speeches have often been unnecessarily lengthy, weighed down by political rhetoric and repetitive announcements. A more concise presentation is preferable, provided it does not come at the expense of transparency.

The problem is that brevity should not be achieved by withholding information that should be made available to Parliament and the public. Measures concerning individual ministries should be published before the debates on their respective financial estimates take place. This would allow Opposition spokespersons to examine the proposals properly, prepare informed arguments and offer constructive criticism. It would also give the public a clearer understanding of what the government intends to do with taxpayers' money.

The government appears to have decided that each minister should have a separate opportunity to announce their measures during the parliamentary debate dedicated to their portfolio. This may provide ministers with an additional 15 minutes in the limelight, but it does so at the expense of the Opposition's ability to scrutinise their proposals.

The case raised by PN Shadow Minister for Youth Eve Borg Bonello is particularly telling. She is expected to analyse the measures relating to Omar Farrugia's ministry before the minister himself announces them. Her parliamentary question seeking clarification on the financial estimates was met with a response that merely referred her to the date of the debate. In other words, she was told when the information would be disclosed, not what the information was.

For Minister Farrugia to respond to his counterpart in this manner is absurd. The minister should understand that parliamentary scrutiny is not an inconvenience to be circumvented, but an essential component of democratic accountability. The Opposition is not asking for privileged access or confidential information. It is asking to know what the government is proposing before being expected to comment on it.

This is not merely a question of political courtesy. It is a matter of respect for Parliament, the electorate and the democratic process. Ministers are accountable for their portfolios, and that accountability cannot be meaningful if the details of their plans are kept under wraps until the moment the Opposition is expected to respond.

There is also a wider public interest at stake. Citizens should not have to wait for a succession of ministerial speeches, party social media posts or piecemeal announcements to understand what the national budget contains. The budget is a national exercise, not a series of individual publicity opportunities for ministers.

The government may have a majority that allows it to dictate parliamentary procedure, but that does not give it the right to treat the Opposition with contempt. Nor does it absolve it of the responsibility to conduct the budget debate in a transparent and orderly manner.

A shorter budget speech is a step in the right direction. A budget debate in which the Opposition is expected to scrutinise measures it has not yet seen is a step backwards.

The government must stop treating parliamentary scrutiny as an afterthought. Publishing the measures before the relevant debates is not an unreasonable demand. It is the bare minimum expected of a government that claims to respect democratic institutions.