PM respects Engerer’s decision to resign but not reasons given
Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi addressing journalists outside Parliament after he voted against on the second reading of the divorce Bill last Wednesday. Photo: Chris Sant Fournier
Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi said he respected the decision of Sliema deputy mayor Cyrus Engerer to resign from the Nationalist Party and join Labour but disagreed with his reasons.
Mr Engerer did not resign because of the PN’s stand on divorce but pinned his decision on one issue: Dr Gonzi’s No vote against divorce legislation in Parliament on Wednesday.
Dr Gonzi said he believed it did not make sense for a member of a political party to leave because he disagreed with one issue and move to another party where he disagreed with a number of things.
“I fear we are reaching a situation where people are no longer anchored to their principles,” he said, adding he respected Mr Engerer’s decision and wished him well.
Mr Engerer resigned from the PN on Friday after calling for the Prime Minister’s resignation in the wake of his No vote deeming such a stand to be against the will of the majority as expressed in the divorce referendum.
Mr Engerer, a gay-rights’ activist with liberal ideologies, said he felt the PN was becoming more and more conservative and he related more with the ideologies of the PL. He is now considering contesting the election on a Labour ticket.
Labour leader Joseph Muscat, speaking in an interview on One Radio yesterday, welcomed Mr Engerer aboard and insisted the Prime Minister should have voted Yes to respect the people’s wishes.
Dr Gonzi stressed he had voted No to remain faithful to the oath he took when he became Prime Minister. In an interview on Radio 101, he explained he had solemnly sworn to take his decisions “faithfully and conscientiously without fear or favour”.
His views on divorce were known to all – he believed it was detrimental to families and society – so he could not go against his conscience just because some wanted him to. He was shocked to see that some people were asking him to break the oath and he had no intention of doing so.
Dr Gonzi added that, as Prime Minister, it was his duty to ensure that the will of the majority, as reflected in the referendum, was respected. His No vote did not have a bearing on the final result. Had this been the case, he would have voted differently.
The second reading of the divorce Bill was approved in Parliament on Wednesday with 44 votes in favour, a dozen abstentions and 13 votes against.
Dr Gonzi insisted he had given Nationalist MPs, including Cabinet members, a free vote to decide according to their own conscience. In fact, 12 voted for, 12 opted to vote against and 11 abstained.
Labour MPs, on the other hand, did not have a real free vote because Dr Muscat warned Adrian Vassallo – the only Labour MP to vote against the Bill – that he would suffer the consequences, Dr Gonzi said.
He added that as the divorce debate continued in Parliament he hoped the Parliamentary Committee for the Consideration of Bills would improve the proposed law.
He was worried that, as things stood, certain guarantees promised in the referendum question were not reflected in the law. This included maintenance and the protection of children.
Popular Stories
Old buses, drivers to return
Former Judge Ray Pace found dead
Updated: Minister apologises for...
Three new Nationalist MPs elected –...
Where’s Everybody staff is given notice
Updated - Director of Prisons submits...
Update 3 - Woman trapped as car crashes...
Revealed...the face of a Maltese woman...
PL reacts as PN labels Franco Debono's...
In Discussion
Old buses, drivers to return
Updated: Minister apologises for...
PL reacts as PN labels Franco Debono's...
Updated - Director of Prisons submits...
Enemalta seeking minimum five year gas...
Protected birds shot and trapped as...
Mario de Marco, Zammit Dimech concede,...
PN postpones salaries as financial...
Updated - PM's offer to Opposition MPs...
14 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mr leo attard
Jul 18th 2011, 19:31
Hmmmmmm! He had sworn to take his decision faithfully and conscientiously without fear or favour --- did this apply on deciding on the honoraria? on my 1.16 euro a week? on trying hard to get me to work until i'm 70 when i'll be moving around slower than an arriva bus!
Mr Alfred Hili
Jul 18th 2011, 18:26
It is very, very difficult for a devout Catholic to be a leader in today's secular world !
People's wishes do not always agree with Church's teaching.
E. Azzopardi
Jul 18th 2011, 13:27
So if there were not enough YES votes, some would have voted YES to see that the WILL of the majority is respected? What reasoning is this? You either have the conviction (according to your conscience) of voting NO all the way or not. But it has been very convenient for those who voted NO, as the will of the majority was respected by their colleagues. For those who voted NO and want to be represented in parliament , I say that they have no idea how democracy works. Why do we hold elections or referendum in a democracy? So that the WILL OF THE MAJORITY is respected. Period. Can you imagine what would happen if those who voted NO for the EU want to be represented in parliament? But I still ask, who is representing them then?
Mr J Xerri
Jul 18th 2011, 13:26
@Mr Vella: No, the fact that you voted no does not mean that you have no allegiance to the people and the Republic of Malta as you were representing you individual opinion, neither did the Prime Minister or anybody else did so if he/she voted no in the referendum, but here we are refering to the parliamentary vote of the leader of the Nation, who voted against the wish as expressed by the majority of the people.
C Galea
Jul 18th 2011, 13:15
Everyone has a right to decide on his own conscience and free will. That is what Dr Gonzi did. He simply sustained what he said from the very beginning and voted against divorce but on the other hand ensured that the will of the people goes through.
Free vote was allowed to all without any suffered consequences by anyone. So what? This is a free democracy and thanks for the initiative of Dr JPO, who by the way is one of the colourful mosaics forming the PN, divorce has now been introduced 2 years before an election. This means that divorce shall no longer be a sensitive electoral issue. I know a lot of staunch Nationalists who voted 'Yes' for divorce but will definitely vote PN.
As for Mr Engerer, what he did was with the powers of the Nationalist vote. But it was his choosing and now good luck to him. That is what Democracy is all about .
Mr Charles Bayliss
Jul 18th 2011, 12:40
I am not involved directly in Politics like Mr Engerer but I have taken the step of leaving the PN as I have not faith in it and it's leader anymore.
And yes the Prime Minister does not respect the people. I was informed a few hours ago that once the Malta Gay Rights Movement had a meeting with the Prime Minister, and the latter tried to ridicule this movement in all that it tried to bring before him. No respect to minorities. Well I need not say anymore. Fact speak louder than words.
CHARLO' SAMMUT
Jul 18th 2011, 12:00
DR. GONZI VOTED NO FOR ALL OF US THAT VOTED NO IN THE REFERENDUM !!!! 48 % OF MALTA DID VOTED NO SO WE HAVE A SAY IN PARLAMENT DO US ???? AFTER ALL THE ' BAWXATA' HAVE PASSED FROM THE PARLAMENT !!!!
Mr Tony Camilleri
Jul 18th 2011, 11:35
His own brother said that if he ignored the decision taken by the people he would be like those whom the people are seeking to topple in North Africa and elsewhere, dictators.
Mr J Xerri
Jul 18th 2011, 09:08
".....he (Dr Gonzi) had solemnly sworn to take his decisions “faithfully and conscientiously without fear or favour”. But he had also sworn to: "bear true faith and allegiance to the people and the Republic of Malta and its Constitutio.".... and the people had spoken clearly in a referendum.
Mr Tommy Vella
Jul 18th 2011, 11:16
A very silly comment if ever there was one!!!
So are you implying that because I voted no for divorce and am still against it, I have no allegiance to the Republic of Malta and its constitution?
Do you agree with every single law that there is in Malta?
If the answer is "No" do you bear allegiance to the Republic of Malta?
Mr Charles Bayliss
Jul 18th 2011, 12:36
Mr Tommy Vella
the Prime Minister is a public official and you are not. You did not go the the Attorney General to swezr yourself into an official position whilst Dr. Gonzi, as the name Prime Minister did. Thus Mr J Xerri is right in his comments it is far from a silly remark. The Prime Minister cannot ignore a majority rule in a referendum and his NO vote was not just a bad example for his PMs but for all the Maltese.
James Camilleri
Jul 18th 2011, 13:55
Mr Vella - as we say in Maltese "qed thallat l-hass ma' affarijiet ohra". The constitution does not tell you to vote yes or no. However it does say that majority rules. So the PM has to "bear true faith and allegiance to the people and the Republic of Malta and its Constitution". This he has not done. There is no question of giving voice to the no vote - it's accepting the principle of majority rules whether the issue is good or bad. Dr Gonzi said that his views on divorce were well known and that he could not go against his conscience. Well and good. But at the same time he maintains that if the vote had gone otherwise (that is the no vote would have gained the upper hand in Parliament) he would have voted differently - so bye bye conscience, values and principles. So I guess that Dr Gonzi acts according how the wind blows? Not very principled then!
Colin Stanley
Jul 18th 2011, 13:59
Also I voted no, so now I have to agree with divorce ?
Mr Tommy Vella
Jul 18th 2011, 16:40
@ James Camilleri and Charles Bayliss.
1. So Public officials have to agree and embrace what the majority wants? Enact yes, but embrace no. And that is what Dr. Gonzi did, piloted the law through without agreeing with it. And that is the essence of democracy enabling th emajority's will, but, I repeat, enabling it does not mean that you have to agree with it. You are right Charles. Mr Xerri's is not a silly remark it is an EXTREMELY silly remark.
2. According to you, reasoning like Mr Muscat, as reported to-day, Dr Gonzi did not accept the principle of majority rules when he allowed his MPs a free vote and when he expeditely started the process so that the referendumn result could be translated into law. I don't know of any other law that was treated so urgently.
Mr Camilleri please be correct when you quote. I heard the speech in Parliament and I heard the interview on 101 yesterday. Dr. Gonzi never said that he would have voted yes. He said that if there were not enough votes to carry the law through he would have acted otherwise, without spelling what that otherwise would have been.
Please choose the reason of your report below: