Arnold Cassola
Divorce conscience gymnastics
In his intervention in Parliament on Thursday, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi was quoted as saying that several MPs were at the horns of a dilemma in their vote on divorce with conscience and the respect for a democratic decision being part of an extremely delicate balancing act. He said the pressure being made on MPs to vote Yes was deplorable and added he was extremely unhappy with such pressure.
What blatant cheek! So we have been clamouring for a decision on divorce to be taken by our parliamentarians for 22 years. When finally Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando took up Alternattiva Demokratika’s invitation to present the Bill in Parliament, what is Dr Gonzi and Joseph Muscat’s reaction? Simple: since Dr Gonzi had three MPs in favour of divorce (Dr Pullicino Orlando, Jesmond Mugliett and Karl Gouder) and Dr Muscat has at least six openly against (Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca, Adrian Vassallo, Carmelo Abela, Justyne Caruana, Joe Debono Grech and Silvio Parnis) the two did not have the courage to submit the Bill to a parliamentary vote, as happens in any democratic Parliament.
So, together, Dr Gonzi and Dr Muscat decide to do a Pontius Pilate and shove the responsibility of such a sensitive decision onto the people. You decide, they said, without telling us they were making us decide because they were shirking their responsibility in Parliament. And, last Saturday, we, the people, decided, and in a very clear way too. Despite Tonio Fenech’s mystic apparitions and Gozo Bishop Mario Grech’s threats of fire and brimstone, the Maltese people decided, clearly and squarely, that they wanted a divorce law to be adopted by Parliament ASAP.
The issue is clear with no ifs and no buts. However, after shoving the responsibility onto the people, a good number of MPs are now trying to bypass the people’s decision. This is totally unacceptable.
Of course, there are some MPs who have had their opinion swayed by the referendum result. Mr Abela (PL), Robert Arrigo, Jean-Pierre Farrugia, Ċensu Galea, Franco Debono and David Agius all PN, have changed their original no to a yes. This way they will be respecting the popular will, even though for some this change of heart can be interpreted as a way of clinging on to their parliamentary seat.
On the other hand, Austin Gatt and Giovanna Debono (PN) and Mr Vassallo (PL) are sticking to their guns: whatever the people have decided they will stick to their no. I must admit they are admirable in their consistent stand but if they really believe in dignity and self-respect they have no other option but to resign now.
Then we have the group of the furbi, those who want to have the cake and eat it. Mr Fenech said he would pose no obstacle to the divorce law in Parliament but refrained from answering whether he would vote no or abstain. Anti-divorce campaigner and Labour MP Ms Coleiro Preca said she will abstain and will not contest the next general election. How very comfortable: go against the people’s will and stay in Parliament for another two years.
The Prime Minister’s cousin, Stephen Spiteri, said he will abstain while Charlo Bonnici has come up with the most hilarious of excuses: he is sure the law will pass, so he will abstain, but then if he is not sure that it will pass then he might change his vote to a yes.
Dr Caruana and Dolores Cristina seem to be still meditating on the opportun(ist)e decision at the right moment. Gozitan Labour MP Anton Refalo has done a disappearing act and has kept all his options open by keeping mum since day one on the divorce issue. This possibility of conscience twisting and bending has been brought about by the encouraging words of the two party leaders. Dr Muscat has said that Labour MPs were free to be activists against the introduction of divorce and were free to abstain on the vote of the Divorce Bill. He also said his party had left the door open for abstaining MPs like Ms Coleiro Preca.
Not to be outdone, the Prime Minister “is keeping all his options open regarding his vote in Parliament on the Divorce Bill, which has just been moved in its first reading. Asked if he excluded voting against or abstaining on a vote, Lawrence Gonzi said he did not exclude anything, noting the referendum outcome was not unanimous”.
What disgusting parliamentary behaviour: just playing about with a possible yes, no or abstention... according to convenience.
Well, by my book this is totally unacceptable. Any MP who has a minimum of self-respect should resign from Parliament before the vote is taken if her/his conscience tells her/him s/he cannot vote yes. This is the only honourable way out for those MPs who feel they cannot respect the people’s will.
Prof. Cassola is Alternattiva Demokratika’s spokesman on EU and international affairs.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
5 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
MaryJo Camenzuli
Jun 7th 2011, 18:17
Il-liberta' u d-demokrazija jfissru li l-minoranza ta' Deputati li huma kontra d-divorzju għandhom jivvutaw liberament kontra biex jirriflettu l-minoranza ta' 47% tal-elettorat li ma jridux id-divorzju.
53% tal-poplu = 53% fil-Parlament = demokrazija.
47% tal-poplu = 47% fil-Parlament = liberta' tal-vot u drittijiet tal-minoranza.
53% tal-poplu = 100% fil-Parlament = dittatura tal-maġġoranza.
47% tal-poplu = 0% fil-Parlament = nuqqas ta' liberta'.
Fuq kollox, l-Alternattiva ilha tħambaq li mqar 5% tal-voti għandhom ikunu rappreżentati bi 3 siġġijiet fil-Parlament, aħseb u ara 47% tal-voti!
Mr Manuel Mangani
Jun 5th 2011, 02:32
Since the popular will is now known, the Bill must be enacted. That much is clear. However, as long as the will of the majority is not thwarted by a Parliamentary vote, on such a morally delicate manner individual MPs should be allowed to vote according to their conscience. After all, the conscientiousness of individual candidates is surely one of the factors voters take into consideration before making their choice.
Voters elect individuals with brains and capabilities to discern, not robots whose only whose only function is to rubber-stamp the popular will.
Just a week ago were we not being subjected to a barrage of reminders about the primacy of conscience? Or is that principle valid only when it serves the interest of the pro-divorce lobby?
Mary Borg
Jun 4th 2011, 18:44
Bl-istess argumenti foqra, allura l-oppozizzjoni kollha missa jew dejjem tivvota mal-gvern jew inkella tirrezenja ghax il-maggoranza tal-poplu fl-elezzjoni ghazlet PN u mhux PL u allura jekk il PL jivvota differenti mil-gvern tal-PN fuq kwalunque issue, ikun qed imur kontra r-rieda tal-poplu!
Dawn nies jghidu li ghandhom mohh? Possibli imma?
Maria Zammit
Jun 4th 2011, 16:47
Dear Arnold Cassola,
Would you kindly stop putting pressure on MP's and how they should vote please? Apart from the information you gave in this article, as I will vote in the next general election, for those candidates that keep their word, and are not swayed by media or other pressure, you article has no value at all, except to put pressure on MPs.
If you hadn't noticed the electorate voted 53% YES, 47% No and don't forget those who did not vote or those who did not pick up their vote. So, in my humble opinion we should leave parliamentarians vote according to their conscience and not have people like you, dictate what they should do.
Did you consider the above when writing this article? Perhaps an apology is in order or perhaps you shouldn't write in newspapers in future since you cannot resign your parliamentary post.. you can resign from your comments! Who do you think you are?!!
Mr Joseph Calleja
Jun 4th 2011, 12:02
I think that some of our politicians are deplorable, including the PM. Why? For some reason or other the PM and the rest of the parliament rejected the idea of voting on the divorce issue in the first place because of conscience (as if politicians have a conscience). So what to do? Not to tarnish their beloved conscience, GonziPN decided to ask the people of Malta to vote on how they felt about introducing divorce in Malta. They spent a whopping 4million euros and offered Air Malta as a sacrifice lamb to accomplish all this. They even got the church and the holier than thou involved, to make sure they achieve the right vote. Lo and behold the people of Malta voted, and they decided, to the astonishment surprise of GonziPN and Adrian Vassallo to accept the issue of divorce. Now that the people have voted and accepted the Yes vote through a free vote? Some politicians, who are still in denial still refuse to abide by the will of the people. Why is that? Their conscience is clear because the people of Malta made the decision for them. Isn't that why they held the referendum in the first place? Hypocrites?