Just in case any readers are still under the impression that the divorce issue is settled, let me tell you that it is far from being so. Please do recall that the €4 million you and I have just paid out of our taxes for a consultative referendum was a complete waste of time when one realises it is in fact non-binding and the government can legally choose to ignore it which is why, ever since its inception, I have, over the past year or so, lambasted it and, in the end, I boycotted it to the extent that I refused to be party to it.

I must admit, however, that the result did surprise me. There will in the next few weeks and, maybe, months be plenty of theories as to why the result turned out to be what it was. From personal experience I can assure you that the fundamental reason was that it took the average Maltese way out of his/her comfort zone because it transcended the usual easy voting according to party lines and allegiances and, even worse, put the average Maltese Catholic into a quandary of conscience. This caused enormous resentment, especially because of the mixed messages from the Church representatives. However, the worst blunder in my view was the decision to politicise the issue by stating that the Nationalist Party, as a political party, is anti divorce, which had the many pro-divorcists who are traditional PN voters spitting blood.

The fact that the Leader of the Opposition refused, despite the pressures put on him, to do the same gave him a resounding political victory by default for even had the No vote prevailed he would have still gone down in history as the party leader who respected the private wishes of his party supporters, which, like the PN’s, can be roughly divided into two in as far as an issue like divorce is concerned.

So where do we go from here?

Management by crisis may appear to work in the short term but in the long run it is a disaster. Since Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando played Garibaldi last year, the country has been lacerated by internal strife with MPs on both sides of the fence throwing wobblies.

At the time of writing we have the writer of apocalyptic encyclicals, Austin Gatt, doing a Padre Pirrone in Il Gattopardo and on the other side of the fence a quixotic Adrian Vassallo doing a Don Ciccio Tumeo.

Both have decided to vote no in Parliament and, yes, they can, however, both must be aware that they are committing political suicide.

We have Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca doing the right thing by abstaining and declaring she will not contest the next election. Who knows what variations will follow in the next couple of weeks as the Nationalist MPs, including the Prime Minister, try to reconcile themselves to this bitter political defeat, which was entirely of their own making.

They can, if they like, procrastinate in aeternum, however, we have Mario de Marco’s word that this will not be the case and that the divorce legislation will pass come what may.

Dr de Marco, who, along with the Prime Minister’s brother, Michael, has to date declared he will be voting in favour, is being the voice of reason spokesman for the stunned government in these very trying days for the PN when it probably feels betrayed from within and without. His is not a task to be envied, especially when his inherent tendency to moderation and persuasion is upset by ministers shooting their mouths off like Dr Gatt in Saturday’s paper.

The divorce result is to be treated with kid gloves as the risk of upsetting even more people than before is a reality to be reckoned with.

People are sick to the teeth of the issue and the prospect of having to spend €4 million every time some social issue is brought up is a very real nightmare. So, now, what if, say, Beppe Fenech Adami proposes a private Bill to legalise abortion?

And what if Robert Arrigo, for example, proposes same-sex marriage? Are we going to go through all this again and again and again?

This is utterly farcical as is the very notion that Dr Fenech Adami and Mr Arrigo should do such a thing but it could easily happen, couldn’t it, and there are already noises in the background that indicate that these are the issues on the agenda. Will we be dragged into the polling booths all over again? How many €4 millions can we afford?

Legalising divorce is seen by many as the start of a slippery slope that will set society on its head. These are the people who voted no. I see their point, however, it was too late to stop the march of progress and, now that the people have approved it in a referendum, consultative or not, the people’s will must be respected.

The more sturm und drang that is stirred up by MPs on both sides, the more respect for Parliament as an institution will be diminished and I foresee the time when Renzo Piano’s masterpiece will be perceived as a mere whitened sepulchre, a blot on the urbanscape of our capital city propagated by the intransigence and pigheadedness of a party that has been given carte blanche to do what it likes for far too long and has long lost the ability to listen and to consult.

When one of its prime movers and shakers declares that people living in a democratic country (if you please) must accept, willy-nilly, every ruling from the government the mind boggles at the sheer arrogance of an attitude worthy of the worst type of Stalinist apparatchik!

We live in interesting times.

kzt@onvol.net