Divorce: time for both clarity and passion

Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando seems to have achieved his aim. His bill will be discussed, and judging from his exclusive declarations to this newspaper, if approved by parliament, the bill will be ratified in a referendum held two years before the general election.

This would mean that the referendum will be about a concrete bill, with clear safeguards written black on white and not simply an abstract yes or no to divorce, exorcising fears of eternal procrastination and deceptive questions.

It sounds too good to be true. Perhaps it is a realisation by Gonzi that the party must move with the times. Perhaps it was an inevitable consequence of coalition politics within the PN. Either way it shows a degree of political maturity. But a voice within keeps telling me that there is more than meets the eye and there could be a final surprise.

Earlier this week, Opposition Joseph Muscat was reluctant to commit his party on how it will vote on the JPO bill. I was irked by the evasive way he expressed his views during Bondiplus (taking ages before saying that he will surely vote for a responsible divorce) but I subscribe to the underlying logic behind his caution.

Basically, at the present moment we have no idea what kind of amendments will be submitted to the proposed bill by the time a vote is taken in its second reading (committee amendments may change the content of a legal Bill) and we have no idea what sort of question will be proposed for the forthcoming referendum. Let us just imagine that the bill is diluted to the extent that it will make divorce only available in exceptional cases. That would change the cards on the table. JPO’s bill is already a compromise which liberals have to stomach. A diluted version of an already moderate bill would be unacceptable.

For it remains to be seen how the rejectionist camp in the PN will behave. Will it fight tooth and nail to defeat the bill in parliament to  avoid a referendum? But will they risk a humiliating defeat in parliament or have they already done their count? Or will they seek a compromise that could split the Labour opposition by amending the bill in a conservative direction? Will there be a final chess move which could outplay both JPO and Muscat?

And will the referendum follow a vote in parliament on the proposed bill? Or will a referendum still be held if the bill is defeated in parliament? And what if the bill is amended beyond recognition? Until all these questions are answered it will be futile for Muscat to commit himself on the procedure. But he could do much more when it comes to communicating his pro divorce views.

What I would expect him to do now is to go directly to his party and get his position in favour of a responsible divorce endorsed by the rank and file members. Surveys show that 70% of Labourites are in agreement with divorce. Why not give them the same say they were offered on the emblem?

Will AD remain the only party in favour of divorce on the eve of a referendum in which mobilization will be the key to victory? Despite surveys showing a pro divorce majority, the dynamics of a referendum are different. In the absence of mobilisation by the Labour Party, the referendum might well be lost simply because of a higher turnout among those opposing divorce.

Every Labour MP should know what the party stands for; a responsible divorce on the Irish model-nothing more but nothing less. That does not exclude a free vote for Labour MPs. It will only make their free vote an informed one. And it will give them less space to waver in case they are presented with a third option at the last moment.