PN’s motion ‘a filthy tactic’ to kill divorce referendum
Pro-divorce movement chairperson dubs PN motion on divorce referendum a ‘filthy tactic’
10 February 2011, 12:00am
Matthew Vella
Matthew Vella
2 min read
The chairperson of pro-divorce movement IVA, Deborah Schembri, has dubbed the Nationalist party’s motion against divorce “a filthy tactic” to turn a promised referendum on divorce “into a possible referendum aimed at striking down the proposed law if parliament doesn’t strike it down beforehand.”
The PN yesterday said MPs would have a free vote but no referendum would take place unless a divorce bill would be passed through parliament. At the start of the debate on Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando’s divorce bill, prime minister Lawrence Gonzi had deemed divorce could only be decided by a referendum.
Pullicino Orlando has presented his own amendments to the PN's motion.
“It unfairly presents the proposed law with a twisted double hurdle. The Prime Minister's reasons for opting for a referendum was that government did not have an electoral mandate to introduce divorce and that on a matter of such fundamental importance he wanted to see what the people had to say before proceeding. That was a reasonable stance and we did not oppose it,” Schembri said.
“However, proposing a referendum only after a vote on the bill is taken in parliament completely defeats the purpose of having a referendum. It is a contradiction in terms since those who self-professedly do not have a mandate to represent the people on the issue of divorce would be doing just that if a vote is taken before going to the people.”
Schembri said the PN’s decision, which will be voting on a party motion against divorce on Saturday, would make a mockery out of any referendum that followed “to have a second chance at shooting the proposed bill down in a ploy to make the Prime Minister seem like he’s playing by the rules and sticking to his word when in fact he would not be doing so at all.”
Schembri said any such referendum would not see whether the people wanted divorce and pass legislation according to what the people would have voted for.
“Coming out with ingenious ideas of how to rob the people of their voice on such a delicate issue cannot be applauded, is not in the best interest of our society and the democratic process we profess to believe in,” Schembri said.
Matthew Vella, a freelance journalist at MaltaToday, was formerly executive editor at Malt...
•
Nhar it-Tnejn il mistoqsija ta' l-SMS fuq il-programm "Inkontri"kienet,Minn tahseb li mill-partiti politici qed jimxi b'mod korrett?
Risposta facli ghax fill-verita' id-differenza ta' bejnithom hi zghira hafna.
Filwaqt li il-partit Laburista qed jimxi b'mod korrett,
Il-partit Nazzjonalista qed jimxi b'mod "KORROTT".
Ehh..Dik il-vokali x'differenza taghmel.
•
Who is to decide on this issue - The People or Parliament????? I say the People, so let us have a referendum and let the PEOPLE DECIDE. Parliament is there to legislate and NOT to decide on personal matters, at the end politicians go to extreems not to loose ONE vote and there seat in Parliament.
•
Gonzi is a scheming, conniving, compulsive liar and a corrupt Prime Minister, like his uncle archbishop Michael Gonzi and predecessor Dr Eddie Fenech Adami.
This move proves that Prime Minister Gonzi is all of the above and only concerned about staying in power. Including trampling over the will of the general public while playing bum boy to the catholic church. A church that protects paedophiles and thrives on discrimination and favouritism. A church with a leader that belonged to the Nazi party in his youth.
The Divorce issue is not just about the money that the Maltese Catholic Church makes. This is about oppressing the will of the majority of the people and a threat to democracy.
Oppression is not new to the Nationalist Party. They supported fascism in the past and they are still practicing it today.
It is about time the Maltese demanded their Civil Rights and do what the Egyptians have achieved in the past few days. There is no gain without pain. DIVORCE will come sooner or later. It is better if it happens sooner rather than later and in the process remove this corrupt Government.
JPO started this in good faith and he should stick to his guns. He can only gain the support of the general public. However, should he settle for a watered down version or pull back from what he started he will suffer when the next general election comes. This is an opportunity for him to go down in history as the politician who brought real change to Malta.
•
With this tactic of Dr Gonzi, we must forget the referendum. Malta should have a consultative referendum before the House votes.
•
This is a lot of panic when the solution is so simple.
1.This little island has always been governed by faith rather than reason so if you whiners can focus on a level like Tunisia & Egypt you can have the final say.
2. The truth of the matter is that the Curia does not make any money from divorce, but it's earnings improve substancially with annulment especially when you have people like Fenech Adami who obtained 3 annulments in his family.(Maybe someone like Saviour Balzan can research how many annulments were received by the families of the Maltese elite and Parliamentarians)
3. Since it's all about money and make no mistake about it, wait till you see how much money the Curia will earn with the Pontification of John Paul II.
Why do you think the rush for Sainthood, they can count the worldly take in sales of Saint John Paul II. Every Bishop earns 6% commission from the take in his diocese. Do you think that's chicken feed?
4. So all you Pro-divorce take heed and withold your hard earned money which you donate so willingly to the two most disgusting and fraudulent political parties along with your weekly contribution for your village church and use this money to campaign for another party that would accomodate the people's civil rights.
5. Not too long ago Saviour Balzan had commented on another blog asking who will finance another party. Saviour and I hope you read this, the answer is simple.
Find eliglble candidates and these pro divorce movement will simple finance this third party by transfering their donations from the 2 political parties & church donations to this pro-divorce campaign.
6. As long as the Maltese keep turning the other cheek, Gonzi, Muscat and the hypocrisy of the Curia will continue to slap you, leep you in the dark and in ignorance to your civil rights.
Wake up Malta is the last country that has not legislated these civil rights.
A country that is so blinded in faith that it cannot distinguish that this legislation will not send divorced couples to Heaven but it will certainly keepthem away from HELL.
•
dottor( saint gonzi and his angels) vera thadmu mohhok biex tidher clean bhal pilatu. mill kumenti tan nies int taf li id divorsju il poplu jridu mela mir reverendum ,fil waqt li tidher clean taqta ix xewqa ta dawk li huma favur u ma titlifx voti. fil waqt li b vot mill parlament taht minn jaf kemm pressjoni biex taqblu u tivvutaw LE, int( saint gonzi and his angels) tidru sbieh u nsara ghax dmierkhom ghamiltuh sew imma fl istess hin id divorsju jaghddi xorta b'reverendum u hekk ma xellifa ma hadt u forsi ma titlifx voti ghax tkun qdejt il kullhadt iva u le u dik l iva u le toqod ukoll perfettament fuq il warda ta wiccek biex tikxef l ipokresija tieghek. UZAJT WISQ IPOKREZIJA, TAGHZEL LIEM TRIEQ TAGHZEL XORTA ,INT STESS GHALIMTNA NIFMU L IPOKREZIJA TIEGHEK U HADT MA JISTA JAVDAK.
Keith Goodlip •
Filthy tactics are always employed by a party with a filthy nature. I look forward to the next elections when my contribution will (hopefully) bring the filthy lot down.
•
to Knocker2
What? Forget the Mistra scandal?
A person has to be judged on his merits and failings and JPO is obviously no saint. His obvious pro divorce stand will always be a subjective one considering his personal plight. He is in a nothing-to-lose situation especially when he has already hit rock bottom and fighting in a front for this crusade is certainly a noble gesture but let's not get carried away either. This is not an absolution especially still JPO has never admitted any wrongdoing in the Mistra debacle.
•
Gonzi's latest move evinces the panic stations situation GonziPN currently lies in.
Not all Grech's parish priests, not all Daphne's diversionary tactics and rabid attacks on PL can put GonziPN together again. JPO must be congratulated in driving a wedge between the conservative element in the PN and the liberals. I propose we forgive JPO for his Mistra obscenities. He has atoned his actions and redeemed himself. Whatever he does, the Gonz is now doomed. Referendum or no referendum, the public has discovered - at long last - the level of hypocrisy this man is capable of reaching even under the full glare of TV cameras and the focus of their mikes. Good, first Gatt goes, then the Gonz follows hotly in his footsteps. Rejoice, my friends, rejoice while the Gonz and company hide in shame and utter despair.
•
Kieku l-ipokrezija tal-Prim tixhel kieku ma kienx ikkollna ghalfejn naghmlu estensjoni tal-power station ta' Dellimara.
•
fuq divorsju qijad taqla panic gonzi ?
meta trid int tkun nisrani u mijiet ta nies ibatu hlas isagerat ma tamel xejn imma ghaliek u ghal shabek hsiebt.
jien kont nazjonalist imma fuq il hmieg li qedin tamlu din idarba labour nivota.
Christopher Briffa •
The PN was always a very conservative party, but during EFA's days they somehow managed to give the impression that there was space for persons with diverging opinions. However since Gonzi's appointment as head of PN, the arch conservative wing of the PN has taken total control of the party. So anyone hoping for the enactment of divorce legislation or of any other legislation increasing civil liberties under the present PN leadership must be living in an alternate reality.
duncan abela •
John Lane does clarify the referendum requirement position. If the intention of the parliamentary vote is simply to propose a referendum and lay out the proposals to be incorporated in the referendum question this is a requirement perfectly in line with the referenda act. However if I understood the motion correctly the intention is to take a vote on a divorce proposal motion and then if approved pass it through a second hurdle through a referendum. This is a completely different matter which smells strange. Perhaps John Lane is not aware of the political contortions we are capable of in avoiding a clear and simple voting mechanism when it suits us.
•
hmmmm nisperaw li din mhux xi loghoba miz-zewg partiti:) sfortunatament hawn 2 partiti kbar hawn biss!
Forsi ser jipruvaw bejniethom biex jghalqu halq JPO u jikkalmaw lin-nies jghamlhua f'xi programm elettorali ghall-elezjoni li jmisss? ghax it tnejn qalu ta , li dien ma kinitx fil-programmi elettorali-
Nisperaw li LE , ghax inkella jkomplu juru x'zewg partiti politici ghanda, issa naraw kif ser tispicca din-il-Farsa f'pajjiz ikkontrollat mil-vatikan.
N.B. il-pajjiz ta ikkontrollat mil-vatikan- ghaliex in -nies LE ! In-nies ghandhom hajjithom u jghixu hajjithom.
•
Now the PN should publish a list in the papers of all its MPs who will vote in favour of divorce and those that will vote against. This will help the public know who are the politicians that they will never vote again for in their entire lives!!!
•
Has anyone here ever looked at Malta's Referenda Act??
It provides only *one* way of holding a referendum, namely, that there can be a referendum on "proposals set out in a resolution passed for that purpose by the House". It's *not* a choice to have a parliamentary vote first; it is the only legally prescribed procedure.
duncan abela •
Frankly I find it very difficult to understand and analyse the PM's decision. Of course there must be some form of reasoned political logic behind it but I must admit it currently escapes me. To bring to parliament a divorce bill which was not on the political manifesto I already find strange. I would perhaps have understood given the consulatative nature of referendums that any result in a referendum would have to be confirmed by a parliamentary vote given the supremacy of parliament. But to turn this logic upside down and subject a parliamentary decision to a further referendum would be simply contempt of parliament as the highest institution of the land. Was it pressure from the church or from the more conservative members of the party who wanted to put a double jeopardy hurdle in front of the IVA movement. Was it a way to reduce the effects of a win win situation for the PL and force their MP's to declare their position on divorce.? Was it some tacit formula between the two main parties to kill or defer the divorce issue for the next legislature. Was it a way of calling JPO's bluff. Perhaps some of these questions will be answered by the tactics and strategies and stance which both parties and their MP's will adopt. What is certain is that we have very byzantine and tortuous ways of doing things especially when certain important interested parties are involved.
Isabelle Borg •
Prim Ministru u partit vera tan nejk. Fejn hi l-oppozizzjoni,rieqda raqda nobis jew?
Joseph Sant •
This is a classic example of moving the goal posts to suit your needs if ever there was one. So if Parliament votes for divorce we will consult the people but if Parliament nays divorce then we don't need to consult the people! What a mockery! And that's apart from the insult to minorities in this country. Even if only 4% of the population need divorce legislation (which is grossly erring on the conservative side) are we saying that these 4% are third class citizens and can simply stop existing for all we care? Honestly I was shocked when I read the PN motion - it was like something out of the Middle Ages... shocked and disgusted.
•
Obviously Gonzi has not heard of parliamentary sovereignty. So much for his European credentials! It is an insult to all right-thinking Maltese and treats them including PN supporters like absolute dirt.
•
this is no longer about party loyalty. Suerely PN must realise that it`s supporters are a different breed from those of PL who would follow whatever their masters tell them. I am so disappointed that PN has been taken over by fundamentalist and ultra conservatives playing to the whims of a Catholic Church which has become lost and confused....
•
What else can you expect from a filthy party!
•
if ever proof was needed as to how obsessed Gonzi is with holding on to power this is another case of him backing down and going back on his word just to accommodate the bull Gatt on divorce. He knows that Gatt is such a rambo that he would have resigned from his post. At the same time they are trying to accommodate the church who were always closer to the party. But times change and people are no longer gullible.
•
A very dirty trick that will kill the referendum! Kollox kontra jghamel
•
This is trickery of the highest order. However, PN must realise that the people are not fools. I have been a loyal and deicated PN supporter all my life but I am sorry to say that on this very important issue I am seeing a party that is entrenched in medieval thinking. Sorry Guys...change your tack...move with today`s realities ...or lose the vote of myself and thousands who have a broader way of thinking than you can imagine.This is 2011!!!!
Christopher Briffa •
History repeating itself. Like back in the 60s, the PN, in league with the Church, is doing its utmost to hold back any form of social progress.
How can any liberal in their right mind even entertain the idea of voting for such a socially conservative party!
How stifling this lot are!
•
As rightly pointed out by Scicluna's article thousands of people are now directly affected by familial breakdown which can only be resolved by divorce legislation.
Considerably more people have grown tired and flippant about what the church has to say about many issues (finally even in Malta), in particular the young. Many more begin to make a clear distinction between superstition and rituality, and true faith and spirituality.
The writing is on the wall. More people want a secular society which makes a distinction between church and state.
PL should rise to the occasion and exploit these societal demands by exposing the false piousness of the PN.
Georgette Bezzina •
This is a dirty trick and goes beyond party lines. The government is trying to gag the free opinion of the people.
JPO was reported to have said that he would consider his place in parliament should any underhand tactics are used. JPO now is the time to put words into action, please stand up and be counted!
•
In the sixties we've had 'id-dnub il mejjet' saga to manipulate public opinion & half a century later we are a having a sequel. Incredible but true. The sad side of this is that once again the maltese will let themselves be manipulated by the political intrigue and narrow mindedness. And this from a party claiming that it will not let PL rewrite history.
Why not simply explain both sides of the issue in an unbiased and intelligent manner and then let the voters decide their own fate.
Let not risk reliving a dark & embarrasing era of our political history.
•
what a farce !
is this the stand that the PN are saying is mature... besides the fact that basic human rights should never be subject to referendums, but should be legislated by government, who is or should be the government of all the population, including minorities, this is a fundamentalist attitude. This is the price the PN has to pay to the Curia, for buying its support come election time.
And we are scandalised by Sharia law, and the Taliban and what's not.
This is the first time in my life that I am ashamed to say that I am Maltese.
