Outgoing Nationalist Party leader Simon Busuttil has acknowledged that “not everyone in the PN agrees with the decision to vote in favour of the gay marriage bill and the issue is a sensitive one.”

The comment, which Busuttil made on NET TV, was in clear reference to the fact that there are factions within his parliamentary group that have been pushing for a ‘No’ vote when Parliament gets down to voting on the Marriage Equality Bill, irrespective of the party’s electoral pledge in favour of same sex marriage.

The conservative wing within the PN is claiming that now that the party has lost the general election, its electoral manifesto ceases to have any bearing on the party and its stances. As such, it is argued, the party in opposition is not required to live up to the promises that it had made with the intention of winning an election and subsequently governing the country.

They are claiming that the PN should not have to live up to its same-sex marriage promise as much as it cannot live up to the promise to build a metro network. But such legalistic tactics and twisting of words will not help the PN ease itself out of the tight corner into which it has painted itself.

Busuttil is right in insisting that he had promised to introduce same-sex marriage well before the election had been called, and that promise must be respected even though he is on his way out the door.

“One must face the realities of today’s society,” he said. “The LGBTIQ community deserves these rights. It is a celebration of love.”

But the conservative factions from inside and outside the PN’s parliamentary group continue to struggle against gender equality. Former PN Minister Tonio Fenech has embarked on a mission to stop the party from opening itself up to such diversity. Ironically, he chose to do so after he left the party rather than when he was an MP and active within its parliamentary group.

Fenech and a number of PN MPs are now claiming that the outgoing leader should grant a free parliamentary vote on the matter. This is the worst possible scenario for the PN, even worse than the abstention on civil union that had been forced upon Busuttil back in 2014.

Should Busuttil accord a free vote to his MPs just because he is being coaxed to do so on the premise that he is only a caretaker party leader, it will see the party go down in history as one the electorate cannot trust on an electoral promise.

It would be as bad as when former PN leader Lawrence Gonzi gave his MPs a free vote in Parliament following the divorce referendum, in which the people clearly voiced their approval for the introduction of divorce, only to see the staunch antiliberal clan within the PN voting against the will of the people that had been democratically expressed in a referendum organised by the PN government itself. Some may argue that back then, and now, MPs should be allowed to vote according to their consciences.

But the fallacy of that argument lies in the fact that what the PN stood for, for many years, was the basic principle of democracy: that of respecting the people’s will. The PN was the guardian of democracy and it is now being challenged by a few from within who want it to ignore that principle to satisfy their conscience.

These individuals have the right to sound their beliefs within and outside of the party, but if they cannot stand by what the party promised the electorate, then it is time for them to move on and maybe follow the example of Tonio Fenech, who was honest enough not to place his name on the party’s ticket.