Editorial

There has been much talk in recent weeks about getting a discussion going on the introduction of divorce. Reality is, of course, that the debate has been going on for some time. It just hasn't taken place at a serious political level - which is the only platform capable of propelling it onto the statute books.

Politicians have increasingly been taking bigger steps in this direction of late. Joseph Muscat started talking about the subject as soon as he launched his campaign for the Labour leadership, and Social Policy Minister John Dalli said in an interview with The Sunday Times last month that he intended to propose that the government starts a national debate.

The Prime Minister followed this, saying he agreed the time was ripe for a debate, adding: "The way our society is developing makes this discussion even more important." Dr Gonzi would not commit to a position, or timeframes.

This may have prompted Dr Muscat, in comments to this newspaper today, to throw down the gauntlet and say he is prepared to present a Bill in Parliament on the introduction of divorce if Nationalist MPs are allowed a free vote. The Labour leader also takes a swipe at the Prime Minister, dubbing him "conservative" and reminding one and all that back in 1998 Dr Gonzi had said that "divorce is no solution".

It should be pointed out that there is nothing wrong with being conservative. Nor is there anything wrong, as Dr Muscat should know himself, with changing one's mind on a given subject. So he needs to tread carefully. The biggest mistake we can make with a debate on an important subject like divorce is to politicise it.

In any case, this debate is not - and people should not allow it to be - the exclusive domain of politicians. It needs to involve as wide a spectrum of society as possible. That includes the Church.

Just after he was appointed in 2006, Archbishop Paul Cremona was already clear on his stance. He told The Times in an interview: "The responsibility of the Church is to put across the Christian message into this cauldron of ideas which the Church believes is necessary for society to reflect upon. Is (divorce) inevitable or not inevitable? I don't know. But what the Church proposes is that if you believe in a stable family, you try and defend it."

A stable family has been a golden thread running through Malta's social fabric for years and every effort should be made to protect that. A discussion that can either run as a precursor to, or parallel with, the one on divorce is why are more and more families breaking up? We need to gain an understanding of this irrespective of whether Malta introduces divorce, and try to find solutions.

This is important because the term divorce is something of a misnomer in our scenario. Since couples can already go their separate ways in Malta, and since children are already allocated to one or the other, what we are talking about here is actually the issue of re-marrying.

So as well as establishing what kind of divorce may be applicable (so-called quickie divorces or ones that take place only after a couple have been estranged for a number of years?), we need to conclude the debate with a fundamental question: Will divorce benefit our society or not?