Labour MP Michael Farrugia told Parliament on Tuesday that the opposition's opinion, expressed in the House or in private meetings, of how a particular Bill could be made better or how a particular issue could be tackled, was part of what made Parliament strong.
Speaking on two motions setting up two separate select committees - one on assisted procreation and the other on the re-codification of laws - Dr Farrugia took government whip David Agius to task who, earlier in the sitting, had said that the opposition was destructive. The PL spokesman said the opposition was anything but destructive, and anything said to the contrary was insulting.
It was the opposition itself that had suggested a select committee on illegal immigration, but the government had voted against on the pretext that there were already existing set-ups to cover the issue.
Whenever the government resorted to short-circuiting tactics such as guillotine motions, this sowed great doubts about its respect for Parliament and the opposition's rights to have its motions freely discussed.
In Malta, IVF had been practised for several years without any form of regulation. During the previous legislature the House Social Action Committee had heard several experts and come up with a report that had never been published. Now, in this legislature, another edition of the SAC had heard more experts, including one who had already appeared before the previous SAC.
The second SAC report this time had been laid on the Table of the House.
The committee had also made recommendations about sexual health, but in the Budget for 2010 the government had elected to ignore it completely. The real problems of sexual health were out on the streets, with sexually-transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies and countless other issues.
Over and above the SAC report, there was a lot more to explore on IVF. This was why the opposition was adamant that select committees should be chaired by the Speaker or, in his absence, by the Deputy Speaker so that their decisions could have more weight. This would also do away with the absurd situation wherein a committee member could not ask a minister for a copy of the report which he would have had a hand in drafting.
Anything said by anybody answering the SAC's questions should be evaluated on facts, without extra weight being carried by the person's identity.
The opposition fully believed in IVF, regulated by a law which could block any wrongdoings and provide full information to whoever was interested in taking this course of action.
Concluding, Dr Farrugia said Mater Dei Hospital had the necessary equipment for IVF lying dormant for two years. Public access to IVF should not be a question of money, and everything possible should be done to fully safeguard the mother's health.