Robert Abela wanted to introduce abortion, limited or not, but did not have the nerve to do it - he knew that without the semblance of a solid reason the electorate would not lump it.

The Prudente situation gave him the reason, which he saw as an opportunity, and he went for it, even though it was the time of a dearly held tradition - celebrating the birth of Jesus.

It was a desperate gamble, pretending to see light where there was none, and Ms Prudente was the lynchpin.

He would have preferred Ms Prudente to delay her urgent condition, but he had no power over that.

So he went ahead. To have delayed would have laid him open to the charge - stronger and more credible without Ms Prudente's case - of wanting to bring in abortion.

Joseph Muscat introduced same sex marriage, he would match that with legalising abortion - limitedly, because to use the Prudente case as the reason for abortion as it is available abroad, would not have held water.

That the Prudente case gave him what he saw as an opportunity is obvious - he could not possibly have chosen Christmas time to bring in that kind of legislation if he thought it were otherwise. On the other hand he could not wait because to do so would, months later, beg the question, why now, not then?

His fickle MPs toed the line - that's why they all are ministers, or parliamentary secretaries, or members of that or the other board, to buy their loyalty.

What will the President do?

Well, the electorate will do well. Everyone can now expect more "cejca" - f*** the national debt - to sweeten for them the bitter pill he is giving them to swallow. The question is, how far will Dr Abela's pig headedness affect his party's electoral fortunes - "cejca" or no "cejca"?

If Bernard Grech plays his cards right, Dr Abela will have a fight on his hands.