‘Proposed referendum question should be clear’

Affirming that he strongly believed in marriage and the importance to strengthen the value of the family, Nationalist MP Fredrick Azzopardi said the proposed referendum question was trying to sell and promote the idea of divorce when it should be a clear and one which did not conceal reality and which could offer a distinction between those who were in favour and those against divorce. The introduction of divorce would be a vote of distrust in the institution of marriage.

The proposed question also portrayed divorce as a concept which would benefit society. In reality, the decision was not as simple and one had to analyse the consequences divorce would have on society as a whole. The question should offer a distinction between those in favour and those against divorce.

Mr Azzopardi said it gave the impression that divorce would not be easy to obtain. Yet, upon examining the question, one realised that all spouses who had not been living together for four years could present a contract to a judge who would almost always grant divorce.

It was important to evaluate the consequences brought about by divorce in foreign countries, he said. In the United States, 50 per cent of children were living in divorced families. Such countries had realised that divorce came at a social cost and were thus promoting the idea that families should be protected.

Mr Azzopardi said divorce brought with it great financial repercussions to couples and this increased the burden on the government. Moreover in such countries, the rate of married couples had decreased even though the fact that people could marry more than once should have seen an increase in marriages. In the past few years, marriages in the United States had decreased by 50 per cent, mainly due to more cohabitating couples. This further showed that divorce did not offer any solutions.

One had to recognise that there indeed were failed marriages. However, divorce would not improve the situation. Countries which had introduced divorce had not seen a decrease in family problems. One could not condemn failed marriages. Society, politicians and the Church should work together to help reduce these problems.

Divorce had a negative impact on children. The proposed question said that divorce would only be granted if it could be guaranteed that children would not suffer. Experience showed that such guarantees were often not honoured.

Concluding, he said that in foreign countries, divorce had not offered a solution to family problems. Divorce had an effect on society as a whole and Malta should thus promote the values it truly believed in.