Former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi said that a free vote could have been an option for the Nationalist Party on the civil unions bill, although an abstention “was also a valid answer to the disservice that has been done to the adoptive process and therefore vulnerable children”.

But the former PN leader did not hold back from criticising the party’s decision to abstain, warning “those of you who are still sitting on the fence, keeping their eyes and ears closed, please note that the floodgates are wide open”.

Writing in The Times, Dr Gonzi was making an obvious reference to abortion, and backed it up by saying that the government “was forced to clarify” a statement made by Minister Helena Dalli which could have indicated that “abortion was a possibility under this Labour government”.

He said he is not convinced that Labour will not work to introduce abortion. “We have heard similar denials before which have since proven to be unfounded.”

Earlier in his article, Dr Gonzi writes that the idea of a civil unions bill was drafted by the previous PN government but this did not contemplate gay adoptions. Gay people do not have the right to adopt just as much as heterosexual couples do not have this right.  “It is only children who have a right to be adopted by the best possible adoptive parents. It is indeed very said that this government has subjected the child’s best interests to those of someone else”.

MGRM reacts

In a statement, the Malta Gay Rights Movement said Dr Gonzi has every right to express his disagreement with the civil union bill as is the right of every citizen. What is unacceptable is the wilful misinterpretation of the law, of which, being himself a lawyer he is very well aware. MGRM may not always have seen eye to eye with Dr Gonzi but the movement always believed he was a man of integrity. It is hard to maintain this belief when Dr Gonzi knowingly chooses to distort the truth, MGRM said.

The Civil Union Act did not introduce the right to adoption into Maltese law. It simply established the principle of equality, at par with marriage, and the right for same-sex couples to be considered as potential adoptive persons should this be judged to be in the child’s best interest by the adoption board set up to administer such matters. This important distinction has been made repeatedly by any number of government MP’s as well as by LGBTI activists.

The problem is not the Civil Union Act and the rights and obligations that it grants to same-sex couples but the firmly entrenched belief that the best interest of the child can only be met by heterosexual family models, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

Dr Gonzi and others conveniently ignore research findings that show that an astounding 22% of women in Malta experience sexual and physical violence by their male partners and that this figure goes up to 37% when psychological violence is also taken into account, MGRM said. Many children, the offspring of such relationships, are also witnesses to this abuse. Proponents of heterosexuality also ignore the fact that child protection, looked after children and family therapy services are having to deal with an ever increasing caseload, irrefutable evidence that heterosexuality in and of itself does not make one a loving and respectful partner or a suitable parent. Neither, to be clear, does homosexuality. Our claim, as evidenced by research is that sexual orientation, is in effect, simply irrelevant.

Let us set the record straight. The current civil union act bears no resemblance whatsoever to the cohabitation bill drawn up by the PN in 2012. What the PN was willing to legislate for, was minimal rights and recognition, most of which same-sex couples could already access through a notarial deed. Despite being cognisant of the position of the LGBT movement, since MGRM published a position paper on marriage equality in January of 2012, the PN government chose to put forward a bill which the LGBT community itself did not endorse.

The disservice that is being perpetrated is not to the adoptive process as claimed by Dr Gonzi, but to LGBT persons and their families. What is being compromised by Dr Gonzi and his ilk is what is true, making of them liars and cheats and anything but defenders of the best interests of children.