I got an email from Joseph Muscat. The subject line said “Pajjiz verament ewropew”. It was a link to a one minute video clip by His Inhobbkomness trying to wriggle out of the fact that the Party of Moderates and Progressives DOES NOT HAVE A POSITION ON DIVORCE.
Inhobbkom is bandying around the idea of the frijjvowt (one word for “free vote”). It turns out that his magnanimous self has “granted” the people a “frijjvowt” – something the Nasty Dastardly DottorGonzi denied them. Yay! We should thank Inhobbkom Joseph for enfranchising the nation.
Really? What has this battle been about? Well Joseph gives us the first half of an answer:
“Jien ma nemminx li din il-kwistjoni hija dwar referendum jew divorzju”.
There you have it. The horse has spoken. So there you are you stupid, peddling peasant who has been celebrating for a great victory for the progressive modern Malta being catapulted into Europe by Joseph and his Horde (+JPO and Mugliett). You thought it was about divorce? Fuck no. It isn’t.
You have been GIVEN the right to express your opinion on the 28th May. It’s an expression that will count for Jack Shit come the vote in parliament following the referendum. Because the same party that is claiming to be dragging us kicking and screaming into the Europe of modern progressive values DOES NOT HAVE A POSITION ON DIVORCE. It has a position on frijvowts. It gives its MPs the frijvowt on the referendum question. It gives the people a frijvowt to say what it thinks on divorce AND it will give another frijvowt to its MPs to vote on the eventual bill in parliament ACCORDING TO THEIR CONSCIENCE. (see “Tie Your Brother Down“).
That means that this sniggering geezer who is so patronisingly smug about moving Malta closer to Europe (puhlease) would love to have y’all believe that the frijvowt is actually a yes to divorce. It is not. Because the probability is that even with a positive referendum result (and Joseph is not doing much to encourage that) the chances are that the 69 eejits voting “according to their conscience” shoot down the bill. Godbless.
Daphne Caruana Galizia wrote a good analysis in today’s Independent that shows how many of us who are in favour of divorce legislation but not in favour of this partisan circus feel. I have heard many friends in the last few hours who are considering abstaining or even voting NO in a referendum because of the whole hijack by this PLPN charade.
J’accuse remains convinced that the truly modern, progressive and (if you want, though I do not see the point of this) “European” way of introducing divorce can only happen when one or more parties have the balls to declare that should they be elected to government they will introduce divorce legislation. It is the only way that the people can be empowered to decide – with a vote at the electoral ballot.
Meanwhile as we discuss our referendum question in 2011 and as our leader of the opposition kids himself of having “allowed” us to express our opinion, (Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster for that) this is the stage Luxembourg is at with regard to divorce legislation. I won’t bother translating. If you can’t read French then you’re not European enough and you’re not bloody worth it.
Le divorce possible dans six mois
Dans les cartons du Parlement depuis plus de cinq ans, le texte tarde à se finaliser. Les difficultés des députés à s’accorder tiennent en deux points: l’opportunité de maintenir le divorce pour faute à certaines conditions (violences conjugales) et la question des points retraite pour le conjoint qui aurait interrompu sa carrière pendant la durée du mariage.
Hier, les députés ont toutefois réussi à s’entendre sur le divorce par consentement mutuel. Ainsi, la durée de la procédure a été ramenée à six mois au lieu d’un an. Les parlementaires ont acté que la pension alimentaire versée lors d’un divorce par consentement pouvait être révisée ce qui n’est pas le cas aujourd’hui. Pour la députée socialiste Lydie Err, «les progrès sont laborieux, mais au moins nous avançons».
I almost forgot… but it’s become our new byline:
In un paese pieno di coglioni ci mancano le palle.
– J’accuse 2011
7 replies on “The Horse's Mouth”
While in Luxembourgish law, there is divorce based on the fault of one of the parties, the proposed bill in Malta on divorce is based only on no fault divorce. It has been stated in Parliament that the Maltese divorce bill is the most “conservative” of divorce laws. So, according to this logic, is the Luxembourgish law on divorce more “progressive”? http://www.guichet.public.lu/fr/citoyens/famille/vie-maritale/separation-divorce/forme-divorce-separation/divorce-faute/index.html
An article on the Italian and Irish divorce laws is found on the Maltese law students online journal at http://quidjuris.ghsl.org/content/grounds-divorce-under-proposed-legislation-irish-and-italian-perspectives-andrew-sciberras
I am hoping that someday you’ll tire of apeing her Royal Caruana Galizianess and spare us those snide “frijvowts” and “majtezwels”, etc.
What can I say… hope springs eternal Alex. In this case the “frijvowt” pronunciation is just as important as selling the lie/concept to the people. Imwahhdin as they would say in Maltese.
I fail to see the importance or relevance of “frijvowt” pronunciation. Please enlighten me.
Nah. You’re pretty well shiny and enlightened as is.
Hello Mr Borg, Luxembourg law does provide also for divorce by mutual consent. Divorce on specific grounds include reasons of cruel behaviour, but also includes divorce based on legal separation for a certain period.Divorce by mutual consent can only happen after two years of marriage. the parties involved must reach an agreement on their properties during the procees, make arrangements for their children, on the contribution of the parties to the education and maintenance of the children before and after the divorce and on maintenance to be paid by any This is in practice similar to what is being proposed in the JPO bill and common practice, yet the obstructionst faction (political or moral obstructionsts)seem to have adopted a strategy to cloud these basic issues.
It is unfortunate that the issue of divorce has fallen victim to political tactics. I could sense as much with the first salvo coming from ABC a couple of days back predictably followed by the runs in much of a similar vein; Now the NP ‘liberals’ argue their case for a no vote! Well, that is Maltese politics for you. yawn and pathos in my pen…
[…] The Horse’s Mouth (akkuza.com) […]