The breakdown rate of marriages in Malta will rise in the next 10 to 20 years since this was inevitable with the introduction of divorce, Labour MP Adrian Vassallo said this evening.

Speaking in Parliament on the Divorce Bill he said that this could be seen in Ireland.

In Northern Ireland, where divorce was introduced in 1922, more children were born outside wedlock than in the Republic of Ireland, where divorce has only been in existence for 10 years or so.

Dr Vassallo said that his position against divorce had been clear since 1998.

The issue was not whether or not one was Catholic or what the church said about divorce.

He was always against divorce because although it was true there were people who needed it, it was more harmful than beneficial to society.

The referendum had been consultative and he had agreed that a referendum should be held since neither the government, nor the opposition had divorce on their electoral manifesto.

The people expressed their will with the majority voting in favour, the minority against and thousands opting not to vote.

Dr Vassallo said that his conscience was his own and this could not be changed according to what the people wanted so he could never vote in favour of divorce.

The Divorce Bill would pass from the House but it would not pass with his vote, he said.

The divorce law divided instead of united and although all countries in the world had tried to introduce a good law except for Las Vegas, divorce in itself weakened the concept of marriage.

He insisted that whatever the consequences, he would vote against as his conscience was not a plaything.

If he was not allowed to contest the next election, he would be able to tell his loyal constituents that the party was now allowing him to contest and he would gain more quality time with his family and for his hobbies, which he has neglected since he entered politics.

He would remain loyal to the party until the next election and he would get his biggest satisfaction in the next 10, 20 years to come when people would realise how right he was in insisting with his no vote.

He said that in his years in politics he had seen the family, which was the thing most dear to him, breaking down and his position would not change, whatever anyone said.

Those who voted yes also had to carry the consequences of their vote as many will suffer, he said hoping that he was wrong but saying he knew he was not.

Those who were believers would have to face the consequences twice - in this world and in the afterlife, he said. At least, he will only face the consequences once.

He also referred to his absence from Parliament and said that he had never missed a division but he worked better in the constituency getting votes for the party than within Parliament.

Justyne Caruana expresses regret that committee for the protection of family is not yet set up

Labour MP Justine Caruana said that in spite of her beliefs she would be respecting the people’s will.

She hoped that both sides would work together to improve the bill for the best possible law to be produced.

Several amendments were needed and these, she said, would be presented at the right moment.

Dr Caruana hoped that a sane and mature debate would follow the presentation of amendments by both sides with the legal minds conducting an exercise which would honour the legal profession.

She expressed regret that the committee for the protection of the family proposed in the Labour Party’s motion was still not set up.

This, she said, was a shame as this committee could have had a unique role in the debate.

The divorce law, she said, should be accompanied by the right tools to protect the family.

Time to revoke 1995 Church-State agreement - Luciano Busuttil

Labour MP Luciano Busuttil blamed the low turnout in the referendum on the fear campaign which had preceded it.

Those who voted yes in spite of their religious beliefs, he said, showed that they believed that Malta was a lay state.

Dr Busuttil said that a message given in the referendum was that there should be division between church and state and that the time had come for the country to revoke the “shameful” 1995 agreement with the church through which the Courts were bound to accept decisions taken by a Church tribunal, where not every lawyer could serve.

He said that in spite of the people’s vote the government and the PN had not yet taken a common position on whether or not it would be accepting the result.

Dr Busuttil said he believed the vote in Parliament should be an outright yes as MPs represented the people, who, in their majority had voted for the introduction of divorce.