It was one of those rare occasions when the Nationalist Party and the Labour Party agreed on an issue – same-sex marriage. A good thing. But Joseph Muscat – the one who keeps talking about unity – once again chose to exploit the issue. He was left with nothing more than a bitter taste.
The Prime Minister shifted the goalposts on the issue post-election and rushed the new Bill forward for debate in Parliament before the summer recess. You would be forgiven for mistaking his rush for an eagerness to get the equality agenda rolling. Yet Dr Muscat had ample time to introduce it before the other rushed move he made – the general election. Instead, he kept raising it when cornered and then shelved the idea.
Suddenly, during a transition period for the PN as it seeks to elect its new leader, the Prime Minister swept in with a different Bill on same-sex marriage. A new proposal required a new debate within the PN, and this is what the Prime Minister hoped to exploit. His goal was to render the PN irrelevant for the foreseeable future by splitting it along the conservative-liberal line.
He was met, instead, by Opposition Leader Simon Busuttil saying in Parliament last week that politicians “have a duty to legislate in favour of same-sex marriage”. Dr Busuttil was backed by two deputy leaders who eloquently summed up the democratic benefits of same-sex marriage.
Dr Muscat’s plan failed. He was left whining about how concerned he was that PN MPs were not voting according to their conscience.
This, from a man leading a party whose members sat in silence before mounting corruption and money-laundering accusations revealed in the Panama Papers. The information was backed by at least three FIAU reports calling for investigations which police commissioners handpicked by Dr Muscat never actioned.
Does Helena Dalli need reminding that MPs are elected to represent different views in society?
The Prime Minister would do well to take a good look at his own conscience first.
The LGBTIQ community deserves credit for its campaign achievements. It changed society, including the PN. The law on same-sex marriage will be remembered for solidifying the progress the PN has made since the mess on divorce and civil unions.
It is significant to have the leader of a Christian Democratic party state in Parliament: “Everyone must weigh personal belief with the duty as a legislator to give rights to all, not only those who share their same belief. We can give rights to others, even if we don’t use them ourselves because of our personal beliefs.”
Dr Busuttil has certainly left his mark on the party’s civil liberties agenda. Yet his legacy goes far beyond that. He stood up for clean politics and brought to the fore again the democratic values the PN has always represented.
The diversity contained in the party’s conservative-liberal spectrum is a strength, not a liability. It reflects society. The media has focused on discord voiced through PN MP Edwin Vassallo, yet it misses the main point if the scrutiny stops there.
The views of Mr Vassallo, as well as transgender PN candidate Alexander Mangion, remain positions based on principles. Arguments are therefore articulated internally and externally. Some will insist, as Mr Vassallo has done, that principle cannot be twisted. I am sure Mr Mangion feels the same.
Constructive dialogue is necessary. Conservatives gain nothing by calling activists extremists, and liberals cannot advocate for tolerance and acceptance if they are prepared to give none.
Mr Vassallo’s views reflect a strong concern in society that must be addressed. Laws imposed without the necessary follow-through in terms of awareness and enforcement will have limited results.
The debate on same-sex marriage within the PN led to proposed amendments. Whether relevant or not, the government immediately shot down any notion that change to the law would be possible. Civil Rights Minister Helena Dalli was reported telling the parliamentary committee that “this is not a supermarket”. Really.
Does she need reminding that that is part of the Opposition’s role; that MPs are elected to represent different views in society? Or should we accept without question all that government proposes? Her attitude perfectly sums up the contradictions in a government that loves to call itself liberal.
This has not gone unnoticed. The perception of the Labour Party among those who truly believe in European liberal values is not the same as it was prior to the 2013 election.
The adoption of the EU’s values was made possible by the PN, whatever you think of the party now. Membership opened the doors for change. Dr Busuttil pointed this out: “EU membership changed our country. It changed the PN.”
This sums up his legacy. He followed through on his commitment to European values, and under his leadership the PN has gone through a real process of change without ever losing sight of its democratic duty on good governance issues. Dr Busuttil has left his mark on the party’s future no matter who is chosen as its new leader.
Caroline Muscat worked for the PN electoral campaign.