Six PN MPs have abstained from voting on a motion presented by the Opposition regarding a legal notice granting prospective parents leave to undergo medically assisted procreation. PN Leader Adrian Delia had personally seconded the motion at the start of the debate.

The legal notice called Leave for Medically Assisted Procreation National Standard Order,  has been in place since May of this year. The legal notice allows 60 hours of paid leave to the employee who is undergoing IVP treatment and another 40 hours to the other prospective parent. In the legal notice, the definitions of 'prospective parents' and 'medically assisted procreation' are different from the definitions found in the Embryo protection act. As such, the PN asked the house to - "in order for there to be legal coherence" - amend the legal notice so that the definitions be identical to those in the Embryo Protection Act.

This however, resulted in allegations being made that the Opposition was being discriminatory considering the wording of the definitions in the embryo protection act are more specific in terms of the type of couples it applies to. The PN lost the motion, with 37 votes against, and 21 in favour.

The Six PN MPs who abstained were Mario De Marco, Therese Comodini Cachia, Karl Gouder, Karol Aquilina, Chris Said  and Simon Busuttil (who was abroad during the vote but was included in the statement released by the MPs)

They said: "We wholeheartedly believe that all couples as workers should enjoy this benefit, without any distinction or discrimination. That a couple seeks to undergo this process of medically assisted procreation presents serious emotional challenges to them; for these couples this is a difficult time and they deserve all possible support. As legislators, we are obliged to see that this assistance is given to all without distinction."

 "We also believe that there should be no distinction based on the manner or the place were conception has taken place. Everyone deserves the highest respect and social justice demands that no one is refused this benefit, especially when couples are faced with such difficult times. Negating this benefit even if temporarily is unacceptable."

"We also state that every child conceived through IVF is a baby that is wanted dearly and with love and deserves full protection even while the parents are undergoing treatment. Consequently we are reiterating that in principle we are against the motion discussed this evening in Parliament. "

"Our position has been known for several weeks. We asked to be given a 'free vote' but sadly note that this was not accepted. In these circumstances, we think the best path to take is one which respects our opinion that this motion runs counter to the principles in which we believe while at the same time respect the decision of the majority of the Parliamentary Group who felt that this motion should be presented. We believe the best way is that we do not participate in the vote called this evening by the Opposition. "

"In matters of conscience, every member of Parliament is obliged to express his vote and we have chosen to express ourselves against this motion through this statement. We are choosing this method since this is the first time when a vote on matters of conscience is being discussed under the leadership of Adrian Delia. We will decide how to proceed on each future vote on matters of conscience."

"At the same time, we were not comfortable to vote with members of Government because our vote could be introverted as a vote in favour of Government. We did and still believe that Joseph Muscat's government is one sunk with corruption and which has eroded the independence and impartiality of national institutions, seriously prejudicing democracy in our country.  We thank all our colleagues in the Opposition's parliamentary group who have shown us support and who have understood that for us this is a matter of conscience."

In addition to the aforementioned five, PD MP Godfrey Farrugia voted against and said that Marlene Farrugia, if present, would have also voted against the motion.  PN MP Claudette Buttigieg was abroad and could not vote

The debate

Government and PN MPs clashed during the debate.

PN Leader Adrian Delia explained that the legal notice has a definition that contrasts the definition within the Embryo Protection Act. "We are in Parliament, not in public debate to earn points off of those who are watching the debate. We are here to observe the law and to pass laws that are in coherence with other laws."

He said the PN is not giving a position at this moment as to whether it agreed or not with the definitions in the legal notice and whether such persons should not be given IVF leave. He said that this motion is purely in terms of the conflict in definitions. He stressed that the law with the contrasting definition is not some subsidiary definition, but is the Embryo Protection Act - "the act which protects life."

"If government wants to change the definition at law, then before passing this law the Embry Protection Act needs to be amended."

"If government wants everyone , those in cohabitation, marriage, etc to have that option, then we have a legal method, a structured method we can use - there is a principle law and government can come to Parliament and request to amend the definition of what a parent means in that law. If we do that we will make this correct. We are not against government helping persons who want to have children, giving these 100 days, for everyone who is vulnerable or has problems. We are not saying that."

"Why wasn't the principle law changed? Why are we going through the window. There is a door which states - change the principle law. If amendments are put forward on the principle law then we will debate. I know there are people who agree and others who don't on that. I am ready to give a free vote on issues of morality. There are circumstances where the Parliamentarians have deep beliefs on an issue, and I will be consistent - where that happens, if there is someone from the Opposition who declares they have a morality issue, when we discuss the principle law that MP can vote according to conscience. I invite government to do the same."

He stressed that today they are not in that circumstance. "We presented a legal notice and we are bringing the issue to your attention. We are stating the act has a good aim, we agree there, but it is clear that this legal notice does not agree with the principle legislation. I ask government to put forward all the amendments so that Maltese don't need to go abroad to do it."

Deputy Prime Minister Chris Fearne said that the motion does not tell government to change the definition of the Embryo Act, but to change the definition in the legal notice, to go back to what the PN introduced in 2012.

Fearne said that over the past years," it seems that where questions of civil rights come in the PN lost its way." He mentioned the PN's stance of divorce, "and you were on the wrong side of history. You were on the wrong side of history when the PN leadership opted to not take a stand on civil unions."

"In 2012, the PN passed a law where if a woman is in a relationship it will be legal for them to receive treatment for infertility. But with that law, if a woman loved a woman, it was illegal, and who helped them do so could be sent to jail. You are telling us to use the same definition, not to provide leave for women who love women to go abroad for treatment."

Adrian Delia spoke up and asked "Am I understanding that if we revoke the motion the government is ready to present changes to the principle law?"

An argument broke out and Fearne could be heard saying that government has the electoral mandate, and went on to say that the motion asks the House to change the definition of a legal notice than gives prospective parents 100 hours leave, to be according to the 2012 (Embryo Protection) Act.  "This is a question of principle, whether politicians should discriminate against a woman on whether she loves a man or woman. This is a point of basic principle."

Chris Said spoke up and said that the 2012 law passed with consensus of the whole House.

Fearne said that this is a question of principle, whether politicians should discriminate against a woman on whether she loves a man or woman.

PN Leader Adrian Delia objected to this, and stressed again that it is on a point of legal coherence, not as Fearne is alleging.

Fearne said that the truth offends. "Our principles are that politicians should not interfere in the private lives of people and we should not discriminate when it comes to medical treatment."

"History will again judge that they are on the wrong time of history."

Godfrey Farrugia votes against motion

PD MP Godfrey Farrugia said that everyone should have the same rights in society. "My interest is the wellbeing of society, and the dignity of every person."

He said society likes to judge people and label them. "There are people who call me conservative and in the same breath call me liberal."

"I ask each and every one of you, what is wrong with giving the opportunity for life to, whoever they are, who did not have the ability to give life when the methods exist. I express solidarity which everyone. All are equal, none are more privileged than others. "

He said that he does not agree with the PN motion. "I understand that what is being included in the legal notice gives a right to all Maltese and Gozitans. What is being defined will not impose on the fundamental right to life."

"There are those among us who fear the consequences. Consequences of what? I agree that the Embryo Protection Act needs to be amended, to include the concept of gamete donation, a concept that offers medical and social solutions, offering every couple the opportunity to give life if they can't. This is not a reproductive treatment per se. This choice does not negate the fundamental right of every person." He said such donation should be done through altruism, and not out of commodity, that the right follow best practices, looking at the interest of the child.

Concluding the debate, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said that the Oppositon is not coherent, "that they occupied the house and do not know if the opposition agrees with itself or not. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad. He said that it is over a fundamentalist motion that aims to divide and discriminate. This government wants that everyone who makes use of IVF, whoever they are, whatever orientation, without discrimination, be given the comfort of a few hours to help in what is one of the most stressed periods for that person."

"Whatever the introduction of the motion states, it is to drop the legal notice, and so is against giving leave to these persons. "

He said that government through this law is seeing that there be equality and not discrimination.

He said that government agreed with the original IVF law as it was the first step

"The opposition's attitude is discriminatory. Time after another the Opposition is being found guilty of discrimination."

He said that he will not stop at any minute from defending persons who want to become parents and children.

He said that this is an emotional subject, "for me and for many other people."