‘Prime Minister must take responsibility for my sacking from Cabinet’ – John Dalli

Dalli, like others from Qormi, is an opportunist. After what Gonzi did to him he still contested the election under the PN banner and when Gonzi asked him to be his "consultant" he still agreed to it, so he should stop his whining and either shut up and enjoy his salary and perks or else try and remove Gonzi as leader. He's just another "tini w'ahxini" PNer.

Dalli has the right to seek revenge after the character assassination contract they took out on him. If anything, the situation shows what a mockery both PN and PL have made of democracy in this country. The fight for power is between factions within the party - the election process itself is an exercise in futility for the electorate - who are presented with a choice of leaders which are not elected democratically within the party. We have a feudal political system with power handed down to their siblings. Once appointed, the leader is expected to be in charge for live. HOW CAN DEMOCRACY BE HEREDITARY? HOW CAN YOU EXPECT MINISTERS TO HAVE THE INTEREST OF THE COUNTRY AT HEART WHEN POWER HAS BECOME A FAMILY BUSINESS. HOW DO YOU EXPECT THE LEADER TO RESPECT DEMOCRACY WHEN HE RULES THE PARTY LIKE AN ABSOLUTE MONARCH?

Yes, there is a big difference in the PN between now and then. During the years that the PN was in power 1987- 1996 and 1998 to date there has been a long list of political scandals for which no one was held responsible. Commissioner Dalli was never held accountable for the following scandals: AMS, Mid Med Bank sale (privatisation) sold for very little, the Daewoo scandal, the anonymous letters scandal, the conflict of interest in the air ticket scandal, the MIA privatisation scandal and many more. He expects that some one should shoulder responsibility for his “forced resignation” because he alleges that the PM Gonzi based his decision on a fabricated report. During the years Dr. Eddie Fenech Adami was PM and Dalli was minister, both of them and many PN MP’s made many false accusations and none of them were held accountable. Commissioner Dalli should reflect on his past behaviour and deeds. While it is true that Dr. Gonzi should be held responsible for all the corruption that has been taking place under his leadership Dalli should also resign and be held responsible for the many scandals he was linked to. Having said all this there are many PN politicians going back many years that should be held accountable for their corrupt practices.

Not really, dear Kelinu. Give Lino Spiteri half a chance, you'll see whether he would have a go at it. And Lino is well over 70. Politicos never age, or at least they are not prone to admitting it. Mintoff was over 80 when he tried to elbow out Alfred Sant with the help of others like George Abela up front and the likes of Lino Spiteri and a couple others in the shadow.

Ghal fejn John Dalli ma jmurx irressaq mozzjoni fuq sfiduca fit-tmexxija tal-Partit Nazzjonalist f'Laqgha Generali , STRAORDINARJA tal-Partit Nazzjonalist flow joqghod iwahwah fil-gazzetti u jara' veru fejnu il-polz tal-Partit tieghu?

Dear John (permit me to address you in a familiar friendly way) - If you think that Gonzi, who does not have the guts to take responsibility to vote on a divorce legislature to protect the rights of the minority and is favouring a referendum to shift the responsibility on the majority to impose their will on the minority, do you really believe he has the guts to shoulder the political responsibility for kicking you out of the cabinet?

Wara li sab skuza biex warbu mill gabinet, dan ma kien bizzejjed ghal GonziPN, lejliet l-elezjoni taparsi ghamlu konsulent tieghu, biex gabar ftit voti li rebhuh l-elezjoni. Wara li nqeda biex tah xutt iehor il-barra. Dan hu l-mod kif jahdem GonziPN, u dan ma wiehed minn ta gewwa. Ahseb u ara ma ta barra. Veru l-kaz li lil Gonzi ma tistax tafdah.

Dear Knocker. By that time Dalli would be close to 70. That is not an age to start leading a party let alone a nation. The next leader has to be found among those who are in the age bracket 30-45.

John Dalli has only one line to pursue: let Gonzi & Co sink lower and lower until they lose the coming elections. Then he will be able to return to the Party, take over the leadership, regroup and prepare for the following elections. It will not be an easy task because GonziPN has gone deeper and deeper into the mire and will need a long time to carry out the cleansing that needs to be done. But Dalli has what it takes and he might even succeed. Wish him luck in his endeavours which will benefit the country no end.

So what is John Dalli's position on legislation that will allow Maltese married couples to divorce in Malta? Yes or No?

Il-P.N. qed jisfaxxa. Korruzzjoni, konfoffi, dizgwid. Spicca ghal kollox taht GonziPN !!!

Sur John Dalli int mintiex xi wiehed mi cwiec u lanqas il finanzi ma huma problema ghalik ghalhekk dan kollu paroli fil vojt tieghek kull ma ghandek taghmel hu li lil dawk li AKKUZAJT tressaqhom il QORTI u dik l-istorja kollha il PM mhux ser jaghtik KAZEK zgur mhux forsi mela kun ragel u daq li ma tistax tiehdu bil fomm hudu bil GUZTIZZJA kull ma trid naqra kuragg mhux paroli fil vojt

This government thinks it is immune so can do what it likes.Shameless luxury for them, scrimp and scrape for you. Is something ever going to change? Perhaps you all believe you can wait until election time.

Dalli was ousted through the spinning and weaving of a few good men at Castille. Malta is being led by "perception" and by a clique of people whose only prioity is their bank account.

Maltese Concordat on Marriage Signed: 3 February 1993 Published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis 89 (1997), pp. 679-694. [In Latin] Agreement between the Apostolic Seat [Holy See] and the Republic of Malta on the Recognition of Civil Effects of Canonical Marriage and on the Judgments of Ecclesiastical Authorities and Tribunals Concerning the Marriage Bond The Holy See and the Republic of Malta — on behalf of the Holy See and taking into consideration Catholic doctrine on marriage and also the expression of the same in the Code of Canon Law and also the teaching of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council on relations between the Church and State, and on behalf of the Republic of Malta and the principles decreed in the Constitution of Malta; — wanting to guarantee freedom of choice in matters of marriage and with full respect for the fundamental human rights and family values within the matrimonial bond; — the Parties [i.e., the Holy See and the Republic of Malta] have taken the opportunity to come to an agreement on the civil effects of canonical matrimony and the decisions made by the ecclesiastical Authorities and tribunals on matters of the said marriage unions. To this end the Holy See, represented by Monsignor Pier Luigi Celata, Titular Archbishop of Doclea, Apostolic Nuncio to Malta, and the Republic of Malta, represented by Professor Guido de Marco, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, have come to an agreement as follows. Article 1 1. The civil effects of marriages celebrated in Malta according to the canonical norms of the Catholic Church are recognised from the moment of their enactment provided that: (a) a marriage certificate has been issued by the Registrar for Marriages following the publication of banns in accordance with the requirements of civil law, or an exemption from the same has been granted and that the certificate constitutes definitive and incontrovertible proof of the validity of the banns or exemption from the same; (b) the local Parish Priest where the marriage has was celebrated informs the Public Registrar in written original copy of the act of marriage in the form established by mutual agreement between the Above Parties and that it be signed by the Ordinary of the Parish Priest or his Delegate, who has been present at the marriage ceremony. 2. The Holy See takes note that the Republic of Malta recognizes the civil effects of canonical marriage when there is no impediment to the marriage union between the contracting parties according to civil law which would provide grounds for an annulment of the marriage which the same civil law considers binding and not dispensable. Drawn up in Valetta, Malta, 3 February 1993 in duplicate copy of the original in Italian and English, both being equally authentic. For the Holy See For the Republic of Malta Pier Luigi Celata Guido de Marco [In Latin] This Agreement between the Holy See and the Republic of Malta was then sealed and approved in Valetta, Malta on the 25th day of March 1995. The signed notes of both parties confirm their agreement and so on the 15th day of May of the same year this Accord comes into force. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr.Lawrence gonzi & emeritus Dr.edward eddie fenech adami- shame on you and your party for this concordat- full read:http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showtopic.php?org_id=13541&kb_header_id=35141 EU lawyers warn: Concordats endanger human rights Concordats help enforce Canon Law, the Vatican version of Sharia Under Canon Law wife beating is no ground for divorce — in fact, nothing is. Therefore if you've been married in a Catholic Church, which means under Canon Law, you may find that a concordat has deprived you of your right to a civil divorce. The Dominican concordat (1954, Article 15.2) says explicitly that people married in a Catholic church, and therefore under Canon Law, may never file for a divorce. So, too, did the Portuguese concordat concluded with Salazar (1940, Article 24). At least in those countries divorce remained legal, even if one had to leave the Church to get one. However, divorce was impossible under both the Italian concordat with Mussolini (1929, Art. 34) and the Spanish one with Franco, (1953, Art. 23-25). It is still impossible in Malta, and the 1993 Marriage Concordat ensures that it will remain so. In a separate development the Pope issued a decree in December 2009 which could serve to tighten up concordat marriage by eliminating a loophole used by those who had left the Church in order to get a civil divorce. This had freed Catholics who had “formally defected” from the Church from its regulations, that is, from Canon Law. “This [meant] that a defecting Catholic could validly be married in a civil ceremony, for example, without a dispensation.” Now, however, that clause has been eliminated: “All Catholics are bound by canonical form in marrying, period.” Including those who consider themselves ex-Catholics. Countries whose marriage laws closely mirror Canon Law will now be under pressure to conform to this decree and prevent even ex-Catholics from ever getting a divorce. full read: http://www.concordatwatch.eu/