Confused? Just a little bit

I guess we are all confused when the same faces appear at press conferences one day in the name of civil society, the next day as Front Harsien ODZ, a week later for the Greens and now for the newly fledged Partit Demokratiku. It is the same people wearing different hats.

Surely if I am confused, so is Joe Citizen’s head spinning. This state of affairs really makes us ask whether the time has come for so many of our community’s campaigners to get together and settle their differences, perhaps put aside their egos, and come together to form one bigger movement. I dare not say big movement, because the number of people who feel strongly about certain issues is really not that big at all.

Some of the campaigners from this wing of civil society are rooted in left-wing principles, which is why a few eloped from Alternattiva Demokratika when it became too stuffy or conservative for their liking. Now, inside Marlene Farrugia’s PD, they might not find that all is liberal in the way she sees the world.

Farrugia is a good talker but stands for practically everything and nothing. I very much doubt that her Partit Demokratiku will aspire to steer away from the established parties. Saying it wants more political transparency and accountability is just not enough. It needs to be radical if it is not to stand in the shadow of the other parties.

Farrugia may have embraced transparency and change when it suited her but when it came to divorce she was an ardent and vociferous opponent. Now she and her partner Godfrey Farrugia, the Labour whip, have spoken out very strongly against the morning-after pill, conjuring that very Christian and incorrect position that equates the pill with abortion.

Everyone suffers from a short memory. When Marlene Farrugia appointed herself adviser to Godfrey as health minister, she was not at all happy when she was told that she could not continue in the role. From then it was Marlene as we know her. Angry and livid at her government, perhaps vengeful too, she had been routed out with her partner. It’s a free spirit that in some ways puts her at par with Franco Debono and Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando. They were free, that is, until they could be free. Debono and Pullicino Orlando are now firmly in the grip of the present administration and careful in what they say, though sometimes they cannot help saying it.

But that does not mean that they are respected. 

This is a small country with limited resources and scarce vocations and experience. Can NGOs afford to be so dispersed, so fragmented and unfocused? No, I do not think so.

It is time for some soul searching and for some bridging, and realisation that together as one voice, much more can be achieved.

***

Which brings me to the morning-after pill. It is truly a breath of fresh air to see new faces and women take a stand on an issue that has shown most MPs for what they are, doing what they are always good at doing. Which is to never take the brave step of looking ahead and embracing the future instead of clinging to the past.

First of all, it must be said that labels inside every box of morning-after pills, state that the drug is widely used to prevent pregnancy after sex, and it works by delaying the emergence of the egg before it is fertilized.

That has led many to equate this with abortion. The Maltese bishops were of course very fast and clear in making this claim.

But the morning-after pill does not amount to abortion. It is a pill that saves women from having an unwanted pregnancy after having unprotected sexual intercourse.

Now the problem here, though I fail to see where Marlene Farrugia sees a problem in this department, is the right for women to have unprotected sex. And to have sex when they want it.

Sex is not only a man’s world. And if women are to be truly free, they must have control over their body, not the other way round. So it is very sad to see that most of the Maltese women MPs are too scared to take a stand because of fear of losing out in their constituency.

Nationalist MPs gladly take the stand they should be taking, the comfortable no-risk conservative dimension.

On the other hand, Labour MPs are searching for courage and words. With the exception of Marlene, who is like a jukebox that sets off the music without waiting for the coins to be inserted.

The real problem is the realisation that women and sex are a real concern for the conservative right. In the US, the argument was not the use of the morning-after pill, but whether girls under 17 should be allowed to buy it. President Barack Obama said that it was just common sense to keep girls under the age of 17 from being able to buy a morning-after contraceptive pill. Citing his own two daughters, Obama said: “I think most parents would probably feel the same way.”

But what misinformed MPs need to do, is to read some medical literature. And perhaps understand the difference between delaying fertilisation and aborting. The morning-after pill delays fertilisation, and is not abortive.

Then, or perhaps maybe, they could come to some definite conclusion.

But I fear that science and facts will not change their views. It goes beyond the truth.  The truth is that most of these opponents are hardline conservatives and want to preserve the status quo that persists and exists in their dreams.

***

I think the Panama Papers and their ramifications were and still are serious. But I think that Simon Busuttil’s demands that Malta, because of Konrad Mizzi, should withdraw its commitment to assume the EU presidency, are puerile.

Why should Malta abort its EU presidency turn? With the same kind of reasoning all those EU countries (and there are many of them) who have questionable political situations should simply withdraw from their commitments to the EU.  

Busuttil’s moral high ground should extend to his own team. He said on Friday in a Metsola-funded conference: “How can the government proceed with (Alfred) Mifsud’s nomination when there are dark clouds of corruption allegations hanging over him?” 

“It’s inconceivable for the government to simply let it happen. I could shut up and let it go ahead, but what would be more damaging: to shut up or to speak up now when we still have the time to get it right? I urge the government to remedy the situation before it is too late; we can have a hugely successful presidency but only if we walk into the corridors of Brussels with our heads held high.”

Well said, but why does he not apply the same judgmental, highfalutin approach to his backbenchers Anthony Bezzina and Tonio Fenech? Once again, I am sure Simon Busuttil thinks I am simply being facetious. If only it was that!