In his opinion piece, ‘Let’s talk - but respect our principles’, (21 May), Chris Fearne slips at the very first hurdle.
He fails to respect the basic principle of loyalty to the truth on what I said in Parliament. It’s a pretty basic principle. It’s not asking for much.
Yet, he claims that in Parliament I said that “since neither God nor nature have granted a right to have children, then so be it”. In other words, couples with infertility problems should just lump it.
This is ridiculously false misrepresentation of what I said in Parliament and Chris Fearne knows it very well because he was actually present when I spoke on the changes to the Embryo Protection Act.
Instead, he relies on a deliberate distortion of what I said by the Labour Party and its media outfit.
Chris Fearne also knows that last week, the Speaker gave a clear ruling on precisely this issue and agreed with me that my speech had been distorted, promptly asking One News to correct their false report.
In his ruling, the Speaker quoted profusely from my speech in Parliament, concluding that I had clearly stated that I am in favour of IVF treatment for couples facing infertility problems. This is a far cry from the distorted picture of insensitivity painted by Chris Fearne and the Labour bandwagon.
But Fearne is so respectful of principles, that he deliberately ignored the Speaker’s ruling and misrepresented my words regardless.
What I actually said in Parliament was that I strongly support IVF treatment for couples who cannot have children and that we should most definitely continue supporting them. After all, it was the former PN administration that introduced the existing IVF law in 2012 in the first place. This law was unanimously agreed in Parliament, including by the then Labour opposition.
I too know many couples, including relatives and friends, who have been through IVF procedures and anyone who knows anything about me would also know that I would be the last to be insensitive towards them.
In Parliament I explained why, despite supporting IVF treatment, I disagreed with two specific changes that the current Government wants to introduce in the law and this is why I will be voting against it.
The first is embryo freezing, because it raises serious ethical problems for me. Moreover, we have invested in a reasonable alternative - known as oocyte vitrification or egg freezing - which does not present the ethical minefield of embryo freezing. If anything, therefore, we should invest even more in this alternative and become a leading country in this technology.
The second is surrogacy, which I cannot support because it commodifies both women and children. Even ‘liberal’ countries like Sweden are in the process of banning surrogacy, both commercial and altruistic, because it exploits women. It beggars belief how, in Malta, a Government that proclaims itself as ‘feminist’ is set on introducing something that is strongly opposed by feminists the world over.
The IVF debate is indeed a very sensitive subject and the President of the Republic was right in calling for a respectful debate.
As it happens, in my speech in Parliament, I also said that I was taken aback by Fearne’s insensitive description of an embryo as “you know, an embryo is just eight cells”. But I did not hesitate in adding that, even so, Fearne had declared that he still ‘respected’ the embryo. I did that because I do not need to distort his words to present my point of view.
So it is truly a pity that, on such a sensitive subject, Chris Fearne is not able to rise above the political fray and respect the basic principle of loyalty to the truth of what a colleague said in Parliament.
It begs the question, why does he need to twist my words to try and make a persuasive case for the changes that he wants to introduce in the law? If anything, that betrays a weakness on his part.
We may well agree or disagree, at times fiercely, and that is understandable. But as a minimum, let’s respect each other’s views without distorting them.
Simon Busuttil is a Nationalist MP