David Friggieri questions whether it’s all about 'mathematical' democracy

Alternattiva Demokratika spokesperson Daivd Friggieri questioned whether the Nationalist Party vote in Parliament would be based on a “mathematical” decision, and insisted on the difference between the “absolute value of belief and conscience” and the “absolute value of democracy”.

Friggieri complained that most Nationalist MPs are being evasive when asked by journalists how they are going to vote in Parliament on the divorce bill: “At least one can agree that some of them look uncomfortable when confronted by journalists on the issue.”

Speaking today on Radju Malta Għandi x’Ngħid, Friggieri claimed that “a constitutional crisis has emerged. Against all odds, the divorce referendum passed with a 53% majority. But now, a number of MPs are feeling uneasy with the result and are evading questions, using the generic excuse of ‘voting according to the conscience.”

According to Friggieri, people like the Prime Minister, Finance Minister Tonio Fenech and Family Minister Dolores Cristina are experiencing “tension” between two values which for them are “absolute” – the value of belief and the value of respecting democracy and the will of the people.

“Which one is going to win?” Friggieri said. “It is clear that in this case, the value of the belief is going to win over the other one. I am not saying that the law will not pass. But the fact that there is such tension creates a problem in a democratic country such as ours, which is supposedly secular.”

But the whip of the Nationalist Party David Agius reiterated that the will of the people will be carried out in Parliament: “The Prime Minister himself declared that he will respect the will of the people.”

“But who does ‘we’ include?” Friggieri cut in, to which Agius answered “the 69 members of parliament.”

“How? With a mathematical agreement?” Friggieri asked.

“No ... but because the majority in Parliament is in favour of the bill. Malta is a democratic country and the credentials of the PN reflect this democracy,” Agius said. He added that laws also passed when they were faced by 22 votes against.

Pressing Agius on the conscience issue, Friggieri asked what would happen if the majority of the PN were against the law because of their conscience.

“Nothing would happen,” was the blunt reply of Agius, while accusing Friggieri of creating a “fairytale”. “The Prime Minister gave his assurance that the law will pass. If we see that the law is in danger of not passing, we would either walk out of Parliament or vote in favour.”

Labour MP Gino Cauchi, who was also present during the programme, recalled what Labour leader Joseph Muscat had said following the referendum result: “Muscat made it clear that the law would pass thanks to the Labour MPs – and he knew what he was saying.”

Taking a dig at Agius’ reply “of walking out”, Cauchi added that the Labour MPs “would not be faced by this problem. We are all going to stay in and vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’.”

Friggieri then pointedly asked Agius if he thought that journalists were losing their time asking MPs how they were going to vote in Parliament.

“Yes they are because we already made a clear declaration that the law will pass,” Agius replied. “There are 33 members of the Opposition who declared their ‘yes’ and there are four MPs from the government’s side who will also vote yes.”

During a phone-in made by Xarabank’s presenter, Peppi Azzopardi said he respected “those who have a problem with their conscience. If the people spoke and their will shall be respected, what problem exists for people like Marie Louise Coleiro Preca to vote according to their conscience?”

“If she has a problem with her conscience, why force her to vote yes? Why should Austin Gatt who has penned more articles on divorce than all those in favour combined together, cannot have the right to vote no?”

But suddenly, Azzopardi went from talking about divorce to asking the guests how they would vote in Parliament if a referendum in favour of same sex marriages and abortion would pass in Malta.

Cauchi replied that personally, he would vote against abortion: “I can also add that Joseph Muscat is also against abortion.” He added, “I would go against my conscience and respect the will of the people.”

He added that one cannot tell people to voice their opinion, but then ignore it.

Friggieri answered that AD has always been in favour of same sex marriages and would definitely vote yes. “However, AD has a clear position that it is against legalising abortion.”

On his part, Agius replied that the “PN has not yet taken a position on same sex marriages.”

avatar
Mathematics of mony = the church! Read: https://mazzun.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/flus-flus-u-aktar-flus/
avatar
David, I would love to attend, but Hastings is a bit out of reach for me. Maybe in another century or two, I'd be able to take the next shuttle out of Toronto (a mere 200 KMs up the road from my house). Meantime, I rely on the Internet to keep me in touch with the land of my birth ... and at the moment, I can't say that I am happy with with is going on there regarding human rights. But there is always hope.   @mikegold117 Ask me again when your 13-year old (grand)daughter finds herself in such a situation.
avatar
J Galea
CJohnZammit. I suggest you proceed one step at a time. Tomorrow, Tuesday 7th June, the party (AD) which has had a consistent position on the divorce issue for the past 22 years, is organising a press conference in front of Hastings Gardens to ensure that our democracy is not undermined following the referendum result. You may wish to attend and we can have a chat about your pressing concerns after the event.
avatar
CjohnZammit unwanted pregnancy? So this will be the excuse to introduce abortion? Abortion should be part of opur constitution
avatar
@David Friggieri I have a good sense of humour and love a good joke, but this is not funny. I based my comment on the fact that you have stated, “However, AD has a clear position that it is against legalising abortion.” (I am assuming that the journalist penning this article has quoted you correctly.)   Currently in Malta, abortion is a crime.   According to your statement, it is crystal-clear that you and AD want to keep it that way ... a crime.   So, you do not want to entrench it in the Constitution as Paul Vincent would, but pray tell, how is your stand going to benefit the woman who finds herself carrying an unwanted pregnancy? Aren't you using the same irrational argument as Paul Vincenti does?   Now, tell me the rest of your jokes.
avatar
Frankly, I admire people who take their conscience very seriously in their daily lives. Its a pity that they did not listen to there conscience on other serious issues in the past and trampled on others people's lives like some bull in a china shop.
avatar
J Galea
CJohnZammit, should I get into a debate with someone who posts such an evidently baseless comment? Probably not. But just to point out just how ridiculous it is, simply consider that Paul Vincenti's lobby group is pushing for a constitutional entrenchment of the ban on abortion, AD is doing nothing of the sort. That's just for starters.
avatar
Of course its mathematical! Gonzi doesn't want to lose his seat that's all! https://mazzun.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/vera-rridu-nsahhu-l-familja/
avatar
In fact i referred to Paul Vincenti and not Paul V..the pope of the 17th century. But then again no big difference here..the former too seems to live in the past.
avatar
Paul V is fundamentalist whereas AD is simply being prudent. It is not recommendable to be openly pro-choice in Malta or else you end up with some dead rabbits plastered on your door at best or set your house on fire at worst. 1
avatar
"“However, AD has a clear position that it is against legalising abortion.”   And with that, I have just lost my innocence ... it seems that there is no difference between fundamentalist Paul Vincenti and progressive AD. Two sides of the same coin, minted in the Vatican.
avatar
One can keep his eyes wide shut and miss the sign of times and vote according to his "conscience" (..aaarg...that C-word again!..plastered all over the place) and the self-same conscience will stick out it's nasty leg, saying,"have a nice trip, see you next fall"... i suggest to stuff the C-word up the rear-end.
avatar
J Galea
Mr Chircop, I'm assuming you understand the meaning of the word "supposedly". To clarify things, you may wish to read this: http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/blogs/david-friggieri/is-malta-a-secular-state
avatar
Mr Friggieri, You are utterly mistaken when you speak about democracy. Malta is not a democracy ! It is a theocracy run by Ayatollah Lawrence Gonzi and his mullahs ! The once glorious nationalist party has been rendered into the Hizbollah ! Our Ayatollah should by now know that after his post referendum result shenanigans, we have NO respect for him and his party. After having voted these last forty years for the PN, I am resolved that as long as the party does not get rid of him, I'd rather not vote anymore. All party members who are Curia leccaculi should resign !!!
avatar
One cannot tell the people to voice their opinion then ignore it! Too true! Read this: https://mazzun.wordpress.com/2011/06/04/dun-joe-bejrut-borg-ihossu-offiz/
avatar
Jeeeez....Abortion ! Abortion is mentioned several times in the above article.. where is GoL-Paul ? The Paul who is loved by all females for adding an additional 9 months to our age.