Gonzi will vote against divorce bill, but 'hopes people will vote in referendum'

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi has stated he hopes the people will have the opportunity to vote in a referendum on divorce, but declared he will be voting against the bill presented by backbencher Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando.

He refuted claims of adopting a contradictory stance when questioned by MaltaToday during a press conference on Saturday. “I did not go into politics to submit to pressure. If this is what I believe in, I have a duty to see it through. At the same time we need to respect the principle of democracy.”

The PN executive committee earlier approved a motion to give MPs a free vote on a divorce bill after a four-hour meeting that delivered a definite stand against divorce. Deputy prime minister Tonio Borg also declared he would vote against the bill.

During the press conference, Gonzi defended the PN’s stance against the introduction of divorce in Malta by saying that this would not be “in the common good” and that it would “create more problems than it would solve.”

He said the PN‘s position is based “not on emotion, but on a factual and contemporary analysis of the current situation of the family in Malta,” and added that the PN could not agree to legislate “in favour of exceptions or one-off cases.”

In this decision, Gonzi maintained however, both the PN and the party executive were “sensitive to the hardship faced by those undergoing martial break-up,” and added that the PN is both aware and concerned of the way the rate of marital break-ups is on the rise. Measures to address this trend are, he said however, “a different discussion entirely.”

He said that once the Private Members Bill was presented to Parliament, the government had the moral responsibility to tackle it and not “leave it on the shelf,” Gonzi said.

In this regard, Gonzi reiterated how the PN’s position remains that the party is against the introduction of divorce, but that government MPs would enjoy a free vote during on the bill. “All MPs should feel comfortable in being able to vote freely and openly,” he said.

Gonzi said that this free vote is the “biggest sign of an open party” that is receptive to other, possibly divergent, opinions. “We are proud of this position, which I believe is a sign of maturity within a political party.”

Gonzi said that the PN’s slightly amended position retains its original gist in that, given the circumstances, the introduction of divorce would not lead to sustainable families and that it would create more instability.

He replied to statements that parties should not take a stance on the divorce issue by retorting that the PN could not help but take a stance on “one of the most crucial aspects of society.”

In line with the position’s three main recommendations, Gonzi said that the government will be moving to starting the debate in parliament “as soon as possible.” He however declined to deliver specific time-frames, saying that the dates should be freely established along with the Opposition. “We will strongly support an uninterrupted debate.”

Gonzi described the PN’s position that the Bill needs to pass through parliament and be subjected to a vote as a “straitjacket” in that the party has no option but to proceed along parliamentary regulations. “Nobody should have the arrogance to presume to change them, even in this case,” he said.

Gonzi said he hoped that MPs would vote in favour of the Bill at first reading stage, allowing the debate to be held. He expressed hopes for calm and measured debate, and hoped that the issue will not be politicised.

During the second reading stage, which would see a parliamentary debate in terms of the principles of the bill, Gonzi also expressed hopes that MPs would vote according to their conscience.

If the Bill was approved at that stage and moved to the committee stage, Gonzi said the government then intends introduce a clause binding the new law’s coming-into-force to approval by a general referendum.

He however raised fears of a possibility of a divorce without a referendum, should the clause fail to be introduced at committee stage (i.e. rejected by the House prior to the third reading in parliament). “Malta would have seen the introduction of divorce without a referendum,” Gonzi warned.

“While I hope that this does not come to pass, I am duty-bound to mention the scenario’s possibility,” Gonzi said. The committee for the consideration of bills is chaired by a government MP, while the six-man committee is equally made up of government and opposition MPs.

Specifically, the motion states that as long as the divorce bill is passed, a clause is included in the same bill to implement article 3(1)(a) of the Referendum Act that will take the bill to be voted upon by a national referendum within two months.

The motion also states the PN’s opposition to the introduction of divorce, and that no political party in Malta has an electoral mandate to proposed divorce legislation.

Earlier on in the day, former minister Jesmond Mugliett declared himself in favourof the introduction of divorce, and seconded the amendments presented by MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando to the executive. Mugliett stressed that the PN must not declare itself against divorce, but "in favour of the family.”

The former minister declared his position at the beginning of this morning's executive, and left the PN headquarters shortly after midday, as the meeting was still in progress. Commenting as he left, Mugliett stressed his belief that a referendum should be held and that "the people should be heard.”

Pullicino Orlando’s amendments called for the State to be given the choice to consider the introduction of divorce. Emerging from the PN’s parliamentary group meeting today, Pullicino Orlando remarked that there was a risk that a referendum would not be held, if the divorce bill is not passed.

An amendment for the motion to consider that the rate of marital separations was on the increase in Malta was approved by the party executive.

Earlier in the day, Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando said he felt the PN’s executive had to focus on a referendum that had been promised by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi when Pullicino Orlando first  tabled the bill. "Irrespective of whether we agree with the introduction of divorce or not, I feel that denying this opportunity to the electorate would now seriously damage our democratic credentials," Pullicino Orlando said.

He said he had not presented an amendment in this respect as he was open to any suggestions as to how the eventuality of a referendum could be ensured.

The pro divorce movement Iva attacked the PN's motion, describing it as “a filthy tactic” to turn a promised referendum on divorce into “a possible refer­endum aimed at striking down the proposed law”.

Chairman Deborah Schembri said the holding of a referendum after MPs would have voted yes unfairly created “a twisted double hurdle” for the proposed divorce bill.