One can only admire the panel of seven prominent priests who put forward a reasoned, conclusive and unified stance on divorce, which has since been backed by the Curia.

While others dilly-dally and hold ‘confidential’ meetings, these priests did what everyone expects. They got together, debated and agreed on a common-sense position on the issue. We are not discussing the content of that report, it is a position on an issue. Denying the Catholic Church the right to express itself on the issue would be an insult to democracy.

The Church is obviously going to be against divorce, and that is its prerogative. What we do commend is the way that the matter was treated with urgency. There were a few wobbles… fire and brimstone from the pulpit and a couple of gross sweeping statements were made. But the Church has a position. The people know what the Church’s stance is, and how it feels about the matter.

The same cannot be said about the political parties. The Prime Minister continues to play with words, and tells us that it is us, the electorate, which should be deciding the matter. This is not a case of passing the buck. It is an issue of keeping one’s options open because the government has not yet managed to get a true and clear picture of what we (the electorate) are thinking.

The PN knows that they have a mountain to climb if they are to win the next general election. Making a suicidal mistake now would wreck their chances at the next polls. So, the government is simply playing with words to play for time.

What does Dr Gonzi mean by it being the electorate that has to take the decision? Is he talking about a referendum? Is he talking about a general election? Is he talking about a referendum before the next election? Is he talking about a referendum on the same day? Will this lead to divorce being politicised? Will it become an election issue? The questions go on and on, and these same questions are already being asked by a lot of people.

The Labour Party is also at sixes and sevens. Granted, Joe Muscat had the rug pulled from underneath him when Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando stole the thunder in presenting a private members Bill in parliament.

But where does Muscat stand? He has repeatedly said that he is open to the idea of a referendum. But what does that mean? Has the PL come up with a position? What about the free vote? Will it be politicised?

More questions than any answers. Divorce is a civil right and is not something which should make it to a referendum question. Divorce is a matter that should be debated by both sides of the House at party, parliamentary committee and debate level. It should not be the sentiment of the people (in relation to manipulation in connection with electoral chances) that decides. A quick lesson for MPs and party leaders. You choose to serve, you choose to lead. You choose to decide, you choose to legislate. So serve, lead, decide and legislate. Passing the buck is bad enough. Passing it on such an important issue is bad, but passing it simply because you don’t know where your support lies is even worse. Do everyone a favour and declare your stances – do not abdicate your responsibilities.

The current economic and social climate is bad enough. Adding such a burden will only make it worse.