David Schembri
Divorce vote costs put at €4m
The divorce referendum on Saturday is expected to cost about €4 million, including subsidies for cheap flights, according to the Chief Electoral Commissioner.
Saviour Gauci said that, based on expenses incurred in previous national elections and referenda, the Electoral Commission was not planning to exceed the €3 million mark in terms of costs related to the holding of the referendum itself.
The figure does not include money forked out by the government to subsidise Air Malta flights to voters residing abroad. This, based on previous polls, is expected to tot up to a further €1 million, bringing the total tally to about €4 million.
Mr Gauci would not give a minimum figure but said national elections always cost something in the region of €2.3 million. “It always used to cost €2.3 million, give and take, but you have to take current rates in mind. Yet, we’re still going to be prudent and careful because these are public funds,” Mr Galea stressed.
The money will come through supplementary estimates because the referendum had not been planned. In the case of local council and general elections, the Electoral Commission would have asked for the money to be budgeted if it knew they were being held.
“Say nothing extraordinary happens in the coming years, we’ll have to ask the Finance Ministry to plan for an election in 2013,” Mr Gauci explained.
Commissioner lists costs
The major cost, Mr Gauci said, was the material used, work and the transportation of the voting documents.
Costs include remuneration to the 3,500 assistant electoral commissioners and 400 police officers, transport expenses, the use of security equipment, utilities, rental of premises for 10 days, overtime of civil servants, upgrading of IT equipment and advertising.
He said that, through taxes, the government would still get back some of the money spent.
According to the government financial estimates, the 2009 MEP and local council elections cost about €3.8 million while the 2008 general election had cost €4 million.
The 2003 EU referendum and general election had cost €4.7 million. These figures included the government subsidies on Air Malta flights.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
35 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Gerry Cowie
May 23rd 2011, 20:29
I'd just like to point out what Ramon Casha says below:-
"We never needed a referendum to introduce divorce and we won't need a referendum to remove it. "
His point will make utter sense should the vote be a resounding "No!"
Christian Sciberras
May 23rd 2011, 15:05
And the money down the Eurovision drain isn't?
And what about the Valletta facelift?
And family gardens in Malta?
Mr Marius Zulgis
May 23rd 2011, 13:00
For "The figure does not include money forked out by the government" please read "The figure does not include money forked out by the TAXPAYER"
Mr Mike Rizzo
May 23rd 2011, 12:49
@ C Muscat
"Thank you JPO and EB for squandering our money "
Why are you blaming JPO and EB? The referendum was the Prime Minister's idea. And the subsidised flights were a government initiative.
Ms D Galea
May 23rd 2011, 11:57
"Ix-xjuh" li ihallsu il-bolla jafu li fi zmien qasir jiehdu il pensjoni.
Iz-zaghzagh umanisti , moderni, ateji u liberali progressivi bhal dawk li qedin hawn jippontifikaw favur id divorzju ghadhom ma irrejalizzawx li huma ha jaghmlu ghomorhom u zmienhom ihallsu it-taxxi u bolla aktar gholja ha jissussidjaw l effetti hziena fuq issocjeta li ha jitfaccaw kif jidhol id-divorzju , imma huma (iz-zaghzagh ) ma huma ha jiehdu XEJN ghax ma ghandhomx pensjoni garantita.
Morru mela u ivvutaw IVA, u ahdmu ha thallsu aktar taxxi ghal haddiehor waqt li intom ha tibqaw b xejn.
Mr John Borg
May 23rd 2011, 13:12
Naqbel 100 fill 100. Divorzju m'hu ha jgib xejn hlief infieq ta izjied flus f'benficji godda ghan-nies iddivozjati issa.
Bl'istess ragunement ejjew nivvutaw biex ragel jista jizzewwegg izjed minn mara wahda fl'istess hin! L'istat ha jccahhaddli dan id-dritt?
Ramon Casha
May 23rd 2011, 13:40
Everybody agrees - including the No camp, PN and the church - that divorce WILL be legalised eventually. It's a matter of when not if.
So, if the referendum fails to pass now, there will be another one a couple of years down the line.
The only way to avoid both the expense of another referendum and the frustration of hearing about nothing but divorce all day long from all directions for several months is to make sure that it passes this time round.
:)
Ms D Galea
May 23rd 2011, 11:50
Who will foot the bill eventually? Messers JPO and Bartolo, the promoters of the no-fault divorce bill? Or will it be the tax payer again?
Mr david debattista
May 23rd 2011, 12:10
Money makes the world go round, the world go round, the world go round, Money makes the world go round, BUT LOVE IS WHAT WE LIVE FOR. AND YOU !
Philip Hili
May 23rd 2011, 13:16
KARTA FUQ OHRA IGUBHOMLOK!!!!
HEMM IL-POPLU MALTA JAGHMEL TAJJEB.
AHLEB GUZ AHLEB!!!!!
Mr Carmelo Aquilina
May 23rd 2011, 11:27
Why do we waste money on cheap flights ? Let foreign based citizens vote at their local Maltese embassy or high commission
Mr Paul Barrett
May 23rd 2011, 11:42
The problem with voting at a "local Maltese Embassy or High Commission" when abroad is just not feasible. People abroad actually live hundreds of miles from the nearest "local representative". Travel can be as expensive as actually flying home and back and indeed take considerably longer than flying home and back to the place of residence.
The way forward has to be postal vote, at least until a secure on-line system can be assured.
Ms Maria Vella
May 23rd 2011, 10:47
What a waste of taxpayers money
Mr John Borg
May 23rd 2011, 10:31
If the "NO" vote wins this referndum...we will easily spend this same amount in a few years time when some other member of parliament (with a personal agenda) decides to re-try to introduce divorce.
The question is, if the "YES" vote wins... if in a few years time we realise divorce is costing the country millions of more Euros in added child benefits, time wasted in law courts fighting out battles, more abuse in the social welfare system etc...can we then propose another referendum to remove divorce? Or would we then be lumped with it for good?
Unfortunately, people are only seeing this divorce referndum from a personal and social point of view and are forgetting the economic burden this will inevitably pose onto the country. For example, like the "Father Unkown" or Single Mother benfits...abuse is bound to happen and with divorce this will open the abuse doors more wide open. The government should not legislate for or against divorce, but should look more into the root of the problem and begin by removing the "Father Unkown" benefits! Start by telling these "father unkown" mothers to be a bit more responsible and jog their memory to see with whom they could have possibly slept with. Furthermore in this day and age of DNA testing...I'm sure you can single-out who this irresponsible father is. Unless thet state enjoys giving away free residential appartments to single mothers who abuse the system of welfare. (Which, by the way...is STEALING)
Ramon Casha
May 23rd 2011, 10:56
We never needed a referendum to introduce divorce and we won't need a referendum to remove it. However keep in mind that no country in the world has ever removed divorce once introduced.
Mr Paul Barrett
May 23rd 2011, 11:36
Undoubtedly if the yes vote wins and legislation is at last approved, fine tuning in future years will take place.
Abuse will continue to be taken by some regarding any social welfare handout, usually at the cost of those genuinely in need.
We just received the "No Campaign" leaflet this morning and all I can say is what a load of absolute c*r*a*_. (insert your own rude word for waste substance).
The only thing that was left out and thus not blamed on divorce legislation is that it was windy yesterday and overcast sky today.
Anyone that has the lack of intelligence and believes the blame for the matters mentioned in the leaflet are caused by divorce legislation is really living in cloud cuckoo land. Certainly they have failed to understand the purpose of the divorce legislation that is being proposed which is basically just one final certificate to confirm the end of a marriage following four years certified/legal separation.
Currently all the "bad" things that are being laid at the door of the divorce legislation are actually happening here and now anyway - people need to grow up and appreciate the bigger picture - the world has moved on and we are being left behind still in servitude and slavery.
Philip Hili
May 23rd 2011, 13:32
Dear Mr. Borg,
You are right. A few years ago nobody ever crossed his mind that the Government had to introduce a new social service benefit for "single mothers". Who is paying for that cost? The honest tax payer.
Now, as you said, if in future the Government will be constrained to introduce any form of social service benefit in order to help financially the divorced families who is going to pay for that cost?
I wait for a reply form somebody in favour of divorce please!!!!
Mr Paul Barrett
May 23rd 2011, 10:30
It the result of the referendum is a win for the anti-divorce No vote then this is money down the drain.
If however the result is a Yes win for the pro-divorce movement then it is money well spent.
The price of freedom is high.
Ms Maria Vella
May 23rd 2011, 14:04
money well spent? why would it be money well spent? has anyone bothered to look at the economic implications of the introduction of divorce or is everyone too busy thinking of their own personal interests?
Mr Henry Mifsud
May 23rd 2011, 09:54
The story goes on something like this .... the government gives a handsome rise in the pay to its cabinet members, who in turn decide to built a new 'House' for them to live happily ever after. This House is no ordinary house but it is designed by a world- renown architect so it is bound to cost a bomb! But then .... when it comes to take some serious decisions, they throw this burden onto the people ...... only at an additional cost of around EUR 4 million, which were not accounted for so they will have to tax the people a little bit more to make up for such a discrepancy. But .... Then the people have other things to think about and forget the real picture. they are squarely divided into two camps fighting each other on whether they should say 'yes' or 'no'! Then when the people speak, those in the 'House' would spend days, weeks if not months discussing in the house of whether the people's will be granted or not. Only to find that whatever the people's decision, they cannot grant it because if it is a 'yes', it will be anti-constitutional, and if it is a 'no' it would have set the people back a few million to go back to square one. Then the people outside the 'House' will live happy ever after, not knowing exactly what hit them!
End of story?
Chris Farrugia
May 23rd 2011, 09:50
Deuteronomy 23:1
If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.
Ramon Casha
May 23rd 2011, 10:54
So grant them divorce so they'll be properly married, rather than force them to cohabit: Vote Yes!
Mr C Muscat
May 23rd 2011, 09:47
Thank you JPO and EB for squandering our money that could have been spent for something everybody agrees on; that is for better preparation for marriage.
Ramon Casha
May 23rd 2011, 10:53
Wrong target. It was GonziPN who insisted on a referendum.
Mr Guido Farrugia
May 23rd 2011, 14:13
What did we agree on? Maybe the huge salary increases the cabinet imposed on itself? Hallina, shooting from the hip is not working at all
Ginevra Alvarado
May 23rd 2011, 09:42
Wow! 4 million?!
Mr Joseph Brincat
May 23rd 2011, 09:37
WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY
FOR THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS THAT ONE DAY
THE DIVORCE WILL BE HERE NO MATTER WHAT
THE OUTCOME OF THE YES OR NO !!!!!!!!!!!
Stephen Koludrovic
May 23rd 2011, 09:13
Now, if only we could scrap both the council, and the general elections, the country could save quite a bundle.
Mr Joe Gatt
May 23rd 2011, 09:02
`The money will come through supplementary estimates because the referendum had not been planned.`
`The money will eventually come`....
Maybe found growing on branches on those magnificent 5000 Euro Trees at the new Bus Station?
Money, is not a problem.
Certainly not out of the Tax Payers pockets, I am sure?
Thank you `Mr Par idejn Sodi`
Mr M Borg
May 23rd 2011, 09:13
Why blame " Mr Par idejn Sodi " ?This was not planned.
Why not thank the 2 MPs who tabled the Bill ?
Ramon Casha
May 23rd 2011, 10:52
@M Borg: Because it was not the two MPs who tabled the bill who insisted on a referendum. They're not the wimps who shirked their responsibility at the cost of millions.
Stephen Koludrovic
May 23rd 2011, 11:46
If there was a lesser number of Mps, there would have been a lesser chance of this bill being tabled.
So Mr par idejn sodi is partly responsible. Just my 2 cents words of wisdom.
Philip Hili
May 23rd 2011, 13:38
Sur Ramon Casha
Mela qieghed tghix fis-shab jew. It was the two disloyal Nationalist MPs who forced the "Par idejn sodi" to hold a referendum because they took edge from the simple seat majority and hold the government at ransom.
These are facts and nobody can deny them.
Mr Joe Gatt
May 23rd 2011, 13:45
@Why blame " Mr Par idejn Sodi " ?
Evactly why?
Because where there`s accountability, `Par Idejn Sodi` was the decision maker.... The Comander in Chief,
Mind you I personally admire his skill at manipulation, he must be laughing his head off with contentment, `bil qalb` at his abilities,
A succesful carpenter is one that is really good, and makes good furniture ect
A good thief is one that earns a good living, but never get caught
A succesful lawyer wins at all costs. Though to win is more a measure of his abilities, but nothing to do with morality.
Mr Tony Camilleri
May 23rd 2011, 14:42
Blame GONZI because he wanted the referendum even though if the yes vote gets a majority Gonzi will keep postponing the issue until the general election so that he together with the Malta Church antikalja will continue with their back-to-the-future stance and scaremongering that if PL wins the election it will introduce divorce. Any bets that he will do so?