Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando yesterday threatened to vote with the Labour Party to schedule a discussion on the party’s divorce referendum motion for today, threatening the government’s one-seat majority.
During a very tense and eventful day in Parliament, the Speaker ruled against taking a vote on when to discuss the motion, infuriating Labour MPs who described the ruling as “partisan”.
Although the government would not give any guarantees on when to discuss Labour’s motion, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi later in the evening said he was personally in favour of a discussion being held next week.
The day began with a House Business Committee meeting, where the PL asked for its divorce referendum motion, presented on Monday, to be discussed by the end of next week.
Deputy Prime Minister Tonio Borg said he could not give any guarantee because the PN parliamentary group still had to meet to discuss the motion. He said various ministers would be abroad next week.
Dr Borg hoped there would be agreement on holding a referendum but said the referendum question proposed by Labour had to be carefully discussed and possibly amended. He said it might not reflect all the important aspects of the Bill presented by Dr Pullicino Orlando and co-sponsored by Labour MP Evarist Bartolo.
Dr Borg said that while the Prime Minister had tentatively agreed to holding a referendum before a parliamentary vote, he did so before the motion was actually presented by the Labour parliamentary group.
He pointed out that referenda were very rarely held in Malta and something of such grave importance had to be given a reasonable time to be debated without any imposition.
But Labour, represented by deputy leader Anġlu Farrugia and Whip Joe Mizzi, accused the PN of “delaying tactics” and said the motion could be discussed next Friday, giving the PN more than a week to have internal talks.
They said Dr Borg could present an amendment to the question proposed and, if necessary, the parliamentary meetings could be held every day, morning and evening, so everyone would be given a chance to have their say.
The importance of this debate meant trips abroad could be postponed or worked around, they added.
In a surprise appearance at the stormy meeting, Dr Pullicino Orlando (who does not sit on the committee but was allowed to give his input) said he would accept no changes to the question as proposed by Labour because it correctly focused on the three cardinal points of his Bill. He noted this was the same question put to the Irish people and his Bill was based on the conservative Irish divorce legislation.
He added the Prime Minister had only last week agreed to a parliamentary debate in the next two weeks about the divorce Bill and, yet, the PN now wanted to postpone a discussion on a much less contentious issue on which there seemed to be unanimous agreement: holding a referendum.
Dr Pullicino Orlando said he wanted the motion to be discussed over the next two weeks but if no date were to be guaranteed, he would back Labour’s request to discuss it with urgency.
“It is about time we move forward. A majority in the House wants the debate to be held in the coming days and I don’t mean just the Labour Party and myself,” Dr Pullicino Orlando said, implying he had the support of other Nationalist MPs.
As the committee did not reach any agreement, Mr Mizzi went to Parliament to call for the motion to be discussed today, which is reserved for private business. But after some deliberation and opposition from the government, the Speaker turned down the request, ruling Parliament did not usually meet on Thursdays.
Mr Mizzi immediately requested a vote to amend the adjournment motion so that the referendum motion could be debated today, adding the Speaker had given a similar ruling to allow for such a vote in this Legislature.
The sitting was again interrupted for the Speaker to consider his decision.
Practically immediately, Dr Gonzi called Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat for a private meeting and the two walked out of the House to deliberate.
Sources said Dr Gonzi asked for the referendum question to be turned into one that did not give specific details of a Bill but simply asked whether or not they were in favour of divorce. The sources said Dr Muscat disagreed.
Mr Bartolo and Dr Pullicino Orlando were seen having a discussion, as the mood in the fully attended Parliament became tenser.
After considerable reflection, Dr Frendo turned down Labour’s second request. He said the request for a vote on the motion of adjournment had been made too late, after the interruption of business, and, therefore, could not be accepted.
Amid uproar, Mr Mizzi said he had made the request before the interruption of business, adding he would be contesting the “partisan” ruling.
The Speaker rejected the opposition’s calls on points of order and immediately asked the Leader of the House to move the adjournment to Monday.
Dr Pullicino Orlando and former Cabinet minister Jesmond Mugliett were noticed leaving the Chamber immediately as opposition MPs hurled criticism at the Speaker’s ruling. Some were heard saying: “Not even in Iran.”
Dr Muscat told The Times the Speaker’s second ruling was “factually incorrect”.
In a statement, Labour said its motion to hold a referendum enjoyed the support of the majority of MPs. It accused the Prime Minister of being “ready to do everything to escape taking a vote”.
“To avoid this situation, the Prime Minister, deprived of parliamentary majority, had to rely on two rulings by the Speaker to stop a discussion which was evidently desired by the majority of MPs.”
On the other hand, the PN said it was vindicated by two Speaker rulings but the Prime Minister, who was personally in favour of holding a debate next week, will now consult his parliamentary group on Labour’s motion.