Viewers familiar with the divorce debate experienced déjà vu as both sides of the debate belted out their well-rehearsed arguments in tonight's final Broadcasting Authority televised debate.

The debate featured lawyers Arthur Galea Salomone from Moviment Żwieġ bla Divorzju and Deborah Schembri from Iva għad-Divorzju, Iva għaż-Żwieġ.

Dr Galea Salomone started off by saying that on Saturday, the country would take a decision which would have a "lasting impact on our children, our families and our society".

"We're deciding whether the model of our marriage should be changed to one which could be opted out of for no reason," Dr Galea Salomone said.

He said the idea of commitment would change, and "a word will not count anymore, a promise will not remain a promise".

Under the  proposed divorce law, Dr Galea Salomone said, "a husband can leave his wife for no reason, spend four years alone, declare the marriage broken and get divorce. I'm not judging him, but is it right for him to impose divorce?"

He also said the pro-divorce lobby was trying to give the impression that there was a wave of people getting divorced abroad and that they were attributing the number of children born out of wedlock to separated couples rather than to unmarried couples.

In her reaction, Dr Schembri said it was not true that the nature of marriage would change, and in countries where there was a 30 per cent marital breakdown rate, there were still 70 per cent of marriages which survived.

"The ideal both sides want is identical – we want solid families. We know there is that ideal, but unfortunately not everyone lives up to it. We do not want the people who don't live up to this ideal out of the equation," Dr Schembri said, adding that the no camp had not given a solution for these people.

She said that even though the divorce was no-fault, fault, if any, would have already been addressed in separation proceedings, and if a couple had lived apart without being legally separated, once divorce was applied for, separation proceedings also went into action.

"I notice the no camp has a lot of ideals; you must know the ideals but live in reality," Dr Schembri said, adding that nothing was stopping people who wanted to separate from doing so, and that cohabitation was increasing globally.

In his reaction, Dr Galea Salomone said that their proposal, rather than to introduce no-fault – or "no reason" divorce, would be to see "how we could strengthen marriage".

"We would have introduced measures to help people, we would have looked at annulment and widened its parameters so those eligible could get it, we could do more for those who choose to enter another relationship – we could do a lot – but let's not dismantle marriage," Dr Galea Salomone said.

He said the pro-divorce movement did not want the voice of children to be heard, as children said the truth, and children did not want divorce.

"Separation procedures are still built around the best remedy for children. With divorce, you don't have to go in front of a mediator. Divorce is a race towards division," Dr Galea Salomone said.

"Divorce doesn't protect children's interests. It protects the best interests of your new 'friend'," he  said.

He then challenged Dr Schembri to say what happened to the bereavement pensions of the first wife, who would have spent her life supporting her husband from home. "Who will take the pension? The first wife, the second wife? Will there be three pensions," Dr Galea Salomone asked.

Dr Schembri replied, saying that even as the situation stood, people still had to maintain their second family.

"One has to be careful not to have a family which is larger than you can afford," Dr Schembri said.

She said children suffered with marital strife, and said that children of parents who dealt well with their separation were happier than children of a couple always at each other's necks.

"I say we need more help for people who are separating, so that they could be good parents for their children in this situation, and give them a serene life," she said that divorce gave choice to people, which wouldn't have been made by the no camp or the state.

In his closing remarks, Dr Galea Salomone said the pro-divorce lobby had tried different tactics, including appealing to a sense of responsibility by portraying a beaten wife, then by calling children "bastards" and by appropriating Mgr Charles Vella's comments for their campaigns.

"This is not a general election – this is a decision which is taken once – once it's introduced it can't be reversed," Dr Galea Salomone said, appealing to people to vote against "senseless" divorce.

Closing, Dr Schembri said what was being proposed was a conservative bill, and what was senseless was a so-called marriage in which the couple did not speak or even live together.

She said the "right to maintenance" was something which would be provided through the law, as it was only within marriage law to date. She also said there wouldn't be a negative economic impact, as separated single mothers who remarried would not remain a burden on the state.

She criticised the no-camp for "nibbling away at their no to divorce" and said people like Lawrence Gonzi, Peter Serracino Inglott, Eddie Fenech Adami and Fr Rene Camilleri had all admitted that divorce would come sooner or later.

"Sooner or later, divorce will come in. On Saturday, we're going to vote for who needs to start a new regulated life in marriage. Divorce is not for everyone. Let us not turn our back on who needs it, some people need it," Dr Schembri said, her voice breaking slightly.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.