ILGA: Pledge for the European Elections

Malta's MEP Candidates who support the pledge - Final Version updated on the day of the election. [See text of the pledge below.]

http://www.ilga-europe.org/europe/campaigns_projects/ep2009/map/malta

Sharon Ellul Bonici

PL

Dear Friends,

I have always supported equality for gays, trans and intersex people by action and not only words. If elected I will defend your interest in the European parliament and will vote and fight in favour of equality and justice.

All the best,

Sharon Ellul Bonici

read more...

Dr. John Zammit

ALLEANZA LIBERALI MALTA

We have been supporting gay rights since 1990 and even take part in gay rights activities held in Malta. Gay rights are also included in our manifesto of the EP election for 2009 and also it was in our manifesto for 2004.

read more...

Arnold Cassola

Alternattiva Demokratika

Alternattiva Demokratika - The Green Party has always been against all forms of discrimination against all human beings. And we will continue working against all forms of discrimination. As regards point 5, if elected MEP, AD and I will promote policies for stronger families. Apart from traditional family forms, different forms of cohabitating couples should be protected. This should be done through the recognition of registered partnerships, including formations such as those in cohabitation and separated persons, people tied by family...

read more...

Yvonne Ebejer Arqueros

Alternattiva Demokratika

I am against all forms of discrimination and I believe in inclusiveness and equality. I am part of a political party - Alternattiva Demokratika - the Green Party - that shares my opinions and views. With regards to point 5, if elected MEP, together with Alternattiva Demokratika, I will promote the recognition of registered partnerships whether tied by family links, separated persons, or same-sex partners.

read more...

Claudette Abela Baldacchino

Partit Laburista (PL)

I believe in a Social Europe. In my capacity as Rapporteur to the Committee of the Regions of the European Union, I have had the opportunity to submit my Opinion on the issue of Non-Discrimination, Equal Opportunities and the Implementation of the Principle of Equal Treatment between persons. Therein I advocate that Europe needs to have policies that are designed to promote active participation and full integration of all member of society, irrespective of gender, sexual orientation, religion, race or physical or economic abilities.

read more...

Marlene Mizzi

Partit Laburista

read more...

Joseph Cuschieri

Labour Party

read more...

Simon Busuttil

Partit Nazzjonalista (PN)

I am signing this declaration as a further manifestation of Partit Nazzjonalista’s commitment to combat all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation.

Our party has already expressed this commitment in Government by transposing the relevant EU legislation on non-discrimination into local legislation and we remain committed to support initiatives taken at the level of the European Parliament aimed at combatting discrimination.

We...

read more...

Alex Perici Calascione

Partit Nazzjonalista

I am signing this declaration as a further manifestation of Partit Nazzjonalista’s commitment to combat all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation.

Our party has already expressed this commitment in Government by transposing the relevant EU legislation on non-discrimination into local legislation and we remain committed to support initiatives taken at the level of the European Parliament aimed at combating discrimination.

We...

read more...

Edward Demicoli

Nationalist Party - EPP

I am signing this declaration as a further manifestation of Partit Nazzjonalista’s commitment to combat all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation.

Our party has already expressed this commitment in Government by transposing the relevant EU legislation on non-discrimination into local legislation and we remain committed to support initiatives taken at the level of the European Parliament aimed at combatting discrimination.

We also remain committed to our party’s 2008 electoral pl...

read more...

Louis Grech

Socialist Group

I agree with the main thrust of the petition.

read more...

Rudolph Cini

Nationalist Party

I am signing this declaration as a further manifestation of Partit Nazzjonalista’s commitment to combat all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation.

Our party has already expressed this commitment in Government by transposing the relevant EU legislation on non-discrimination into local legislation and we remain committed to support initiatives taken at the level of the European Parliament aimed at combatting discrimination.

We also remain commi...

read more...

Roberta Metsola Tedesco Triccas

Partit Nazzjonalista

I am signing this declaration as a further manifestation of Partit Nazzjonalista’s commitment to combat all forms of discrimination, including on the basis of sexual orientation.

Our party has already expressed this commitment in Government by transposing the relevant EU legislation on non-discrimination into local legislation and we remain committed to support initiatives taken at the level of the European Parliament aimed at combatting discrimination.

We also remain committed to our party’s 2008 electoral pl...

read more...

Maria Camilleri

LP

read more...

Edward Scicluna

PL

read more...

---

http://ilga-europe.org/europe/campaigns_projects/ep2009/ilga_europe_s_european_parliament_elections_pledge

ILGA-Europe’s 2009 European Election Pledge summarises the key issues that we want to see advanced at the EU level over the next five years. These are:

1. Adopting ambitious EU legislation on equal treatment
I pledge to continue to support and to actively work towards the adoption of an EU multi-ground anti-discrimination directive as an essential step in ending the hierarchy of rights.

2. Ensuring the right to free movement in the EU for LGBT people
I pledge to ensure that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people are able to exercise their right to free movement in the EU with their families, including by closely monitoring the implementation of the Freedom of Movement Directive and by supporting measures to increase mutual recognition of partnerships.

3. Increasing explicit recognition of transgender people’s rights
I pledge to call for explicit recognition of the rights of transgender people in EU law, including by ensuring adequate coverage of transgender people in future EU gender equality legislation and policy and by closely monitoring implementation of the Gender Equality Directives with regard to their coverage of transgender people.

4. Combating homophobia and transphobia through criminal law
I pledge to call for a Framework Decision on homophobic and transphobic violence, hate crime and hate speech following the recommendation issued in the legal study on homophobia of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency.

5. Promoting an inclusive definition of family
I pledge to promote a definition of family which recognises the diversity of family relationships, and to ensure that the needs of LGBT families are increasingly reflected in EU policy and legislation (e.g. the Parental Leave Directive).

6. Acting as the EU’s fundamental rights watchdog, including on LGBT rights
I pledge to hold EU Member States accountable to their human rights commitments and to be a voice against human rights violations targeting LGBT people in the EU (e.g. freedom of assembly, asylum of people at risk of persecution).

7. Protecting LGBT rights in Europe beyond the EU
I pledge to promote the human rights of LGBT people within the European Neighbourhood Policy, the EU Central Asia indicative programmes and Enlargement through political dialogue and recommending adoption of inclusive anti-discrimination laws.

8. Protecting LGBT rights in the world
I pledge to support Parliament resolutions and actions condemning human rights violations against LGBT people outside the EU and calling for the end of criminalisation of homosexuality.

9. Calling for an explicit commitment to fundamental rights from the new EU Commission
I pledge to prioritise the commitment to fundamental rights and equality in the approval of the new European Commission and to call for an explicit expression of this commitment by all the members of the EU Commission.

10. Ongoing commitment to the EU agenda in the area of non-discrimination and equality
I pledge to support programmes that ensure continued EU funding for effective and necessary action to combat discrimination and promote equality on the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

Times: Confessions of a Labour Party convert

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090604/letters/confessions-of-a-labour-party-convert

Thursday, 4th June 2009 by Albert Gauci Cunningham, Buġibba

There were many who approached me and asked how come I am writing in favour of the Labour Party. Some seemed shocked, others snubbed me but most agreed with my point of view. I have to admit that coming from a very Nationalist background it was pretty hard to try Labour out and though the PN is in its worst form right now it still was a bit of a shock to go to the Labour Party headquarters in Ħamrun and speak to people I had criticised so much. And yet I still don't understand why so many disgruntled and hurt Nationalists who believed that the PN had really learnt its lessons before March 2008, and who are now realising their mistake, find it so difficult to try Labour out.

Let's face it, as things stand right now this might end up as one of the worst, if not the worst, Nationalist legislatures ever. Lawrence Gonzi, who was the PN's biggest asset, is slowly but surely becoming one of its biggest liabilities. Arrogance is at a record high, broken promises galore, finances out of control and decisions go diametrically opposite to what we voted for such as in the Delimara power station saga. The PN has become the "no" party; no to everything anyone says especially if that someone happens to be called Joseph Muscat. The party thinks it can bull-doze anything it fancies down our throats and tragically it is taking the shape of a quasi-dictatorial party (election campaign apart).

So what's the difference between me and most of the others I meet? Simple. The others moan, groan, complain and sulk but in the same breath try to find every imaginable excuse to vote PN when push comes to shove while I decided to break my family "tradition" and act!

Being gay and quite liberal I decided to take a step towards the left which unfortunately in Malta seems to be considered as a "bold" move. When the PN became too arrogant and deceitful to handle I decided to "march" to the Labour HQ and see for myself if it's true that whether we like it or not we have to remain stuck with this conservative lot forever and ever. What did I find within the Labour party? Did I find all the ħamalli and nincompoops that we were always indoctrinated to believe the Labour Party to be made of? Not at all. What I did find is a group of people who accept even a once ardent Nationalist supporter with a very Nationalist background like me with open arms. I found a party in which some of the young members I've met openly say they are pro-EU and some even voted "Yes" for the EU, but most of all I found an environment where people are full of energy and ideas all working to build a coalition of citizens from all walks of life.

Is the PL perfect? Definitely not! Will it falter? I have no doubt it will and let's be fair, the Nationalists have done a lot of good to this country and the young generation is quite appreciative of the fact that it was Eddie Fenech Adami's PN that fought for the fulfilment of our European dream. Yet it's time to move ahead now, it's time for the Nationalists to re-invent themselves and shed the arrogance, it's time Malta is given back to those who can build bridges with the people and it's time to embrace the past and prepare for the future. It's time to go Labour! And June 6 is only the first and the smaller part of this equation.

[Click on the hyperlink above to view the comments on the Times' website. ]

YouTube: Jean Pierre Sammut Address to the Nation MEP Elections 2009 [Alleanza Liberali]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sql-GIGo28Q#t=3m05s

Scroll to 3:05 for Gay Marriage/Civil Partnership.

[P. Attard's Note: I received this video once the voting was over]

EU Election: Louis Grech best-performing MEP on gay rights; Simon Busuttil worst

3.6.9 by Dr Inġ. Patrick Attard

[Click on the image to enlarge.] - Note the Catania report also discusses abortion.

According to the MaltaToday report, Louis Grech was the best performing MEP on gay rights, whereas Dr Simon Busuttil was the worst. Click on image above.

See complete article here:
http://patrickattard.blogspot.com/2009/05/maltatoday-four-mep-candidates-sign-gay.html

Why are resolutions on homophobia (hate/violence/torture on gays) important in Europe? Casa and Busuttil opposed or abstained in these motions. See Malta Police's reply on gay-hate-book:
http://patrickattard.blogspot.com/2009/05/police-letter-regarding-book-catholic.html

See detailed information on each resolution and votes here:
http://www.ilga-europe.org/europe/campaigns_projects/ep2009/what_can_you_do/get_to_know_the_candidates_and_their_position_on_human_rights_and_lgbt_issues/summary_of_voting_records_of_members_of_the_european_parliament_recent_resolutions_relevant_to_the_rights_of_lgbt_people_2004_2009

Read articles related to the EU Election here:
http://patrickattard.blogspot.com/search/label/EU%20Parliament%20Election%20Jun09


Vote wisely!

Dr Inġ. Patrick Attard

Message from Sharon Ellul Bonici to gay voters

Message from Sharon Ellul-Bonici to all Members of the Malta Gay Rights Movement (MGRM).

4.6.9

[P. Attard's Note: The message was sent to all the MGRM members against payment. No payment has been requested (or donation received) to post this advert here. It is posted here for completeness sake since it is related to gay-issues in Malta and the up-coming EU Election.]

[Click on image for an enlarged and legible version.]

MaltaToday: The ‘outreach’ campaign [Interview: Simon Busuttil]

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/05/31/interview.html

31.5.9 by Matthew Vella

PN frontrunner SIMON BUSUTTIL is at the helm of a campaign to try and elect a third MEP, but the popular mood bodes stormy seas for this captain

MATTHEW VELLA

It’s been yet another interesting campaign for the Nationalists, whose line-up of candidates, each appealing to a different sector of society, produced a couple of contradictory statements along the line. 
Metsola Tedesco Triccas, for instance, came out in favour of VAT reductions on car tax, against Tonio Fenech’s own conviction. She also supports extending maternity leave when the government has told the European Commission it does not share her opinion. Elsewhere, Edward Demicoli and Alex Perici Calascione have aired drastically contrasting views on Spring hunting; and Frank Portelli’s anti-Libya crusade raised the ire of home affairs minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici.
At the helm of this impressive mix of aspirant MEPs is Simon Busuttil: recently touted as the PN’s next leader and prime minister by Alan Deidun, the party’s token environmentalist for the election, whose genial yet naïve praise for Busuttil at the last PN general council will certainly not win him any second-preference votes. 
Busuttil himself gives me radio silence when I bring it up jokingly, preferring to busy himself in the kitchen to make us a cup of coffee.
Talk about embarrassing moments: we meet just two days before Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando’s ill-timed party for Perici Calascione on his Mistra land – scene of the controversial scandal that almost cost the PN the election last year. 
Busuttil, concise and pithily, comments: “I think it’s in bad taste”.
Busuttil is not just top dog in this election, he is also an architect of the PN campaign. “In everything we do, we want to try and get three MEPs and not two. I paid the price for having two MEPs... with the most basic work, from burden sharing to other less crucial matters, falling on us two without any support from the Labour MEPs. If we got results with two MEPs, think of what we can do with three…”
The Nationalists’ main plank for this campaign is about jobs. Busuttil says MEPs will assiduously focus on matters that will bring more jobs to Malta. He cites the Insolvency II Directive, in which he garnered support of his MEP colleagues to vote down parts of the directive that would have “killed part of our insurance sector”.
“This means I helped to protect and create jobs for Malta. We protected the medicinal generics sector; curbed environmental clauses that went too far and could have killed enterprises and jobs: for example, the inclusion of aviation in the emissions trading scheme would have devastated Air Malta. We fought against this, protecting jobs and tourism.”
Busuttil sums it up: “Making the link (with jobs) is what we should be about. We will see whether laws in the EP are good for jobs, or if they threaten jobs in Malta.”
Expecting this election to deliver the party a major blow, both in terms of turnout and overall vote after its 2004 drubbing (just over 39% of the national vote), the PN is really trying to reach out to everyone.
For example, despite the government’s stated opposition to extending maternity leave because of business concerns, Lawrence Gonzi recently stated he is actually in favour of extending it “as long as member states are on a level playing field.”
Busuttil argues that without this level playing field, small and medium enterprises will be disadvantaged. 
“It’s because the rule won’t apply to each member state. And we’re willing to discuss the extension, so is the EPP. But we want this to be the same for every member state and guarantee the same conditions for everyone.”
Busuttil says the eclectic mix of candidates all “agree with the PN’s principles and values. As long as they fall within these parameters, they are free to express themselves on how they interpret their parliamentary mandate. Even I have disagreed in the past with government positions… Labour has candidates who don’t agree on EU membership, or on free healthcare, such as Edward Scicluna.”
What about Gonzi’s pow-wow with hunters? What’s the PN trying to do there at all, now that the European Commission has taken the government to court over the opening of the spring hunting season?
“It’s about honouring one’s commitments,” Busuttil says. “We wanted to enter the EU as a united people, and we addressed hunters’ concerns to bring them on board in 2003. What was said then must be honoured to the last dot. Now government must defend its case in the European Court of Justice and yes, it must communicate with the hunters and tell them we’re honouring our commitments. It’s not about pro- or anti-hunting.”
One clear attempt at reaching out by the PN was signing the International Lesbian Gay Association’s (ILGA) pledge for MEPs. Despite ILGA’s claim that Busuttil and David Casa have the worst track record on gay rights and resolutions in the EP, Busuttil says he has actually voted in favour of other resolutions on gay rights.
He says the PN wants to work with the Malta Gay Rights Movement, but that the MGRM has to understand its red lines. “I’m ready to fight against any form of discrimination against homosexual persons, but there are two red lines I cannot cross: same sex marriage, and gay adoptions. Whenever there is a direct or indirect reference to these two things, I have to vote against – the furthest I can go is to abstain.”
Busuttil is quick to point out that MEPs insert “obvious references” to same-sex marriage in resolutions condemning homophobia just to put people like himself and the European People’s Party “in an embarrassing position”.
But the ILGA petition also includes supporting parental leave for gay parents – isn’t that one of the indirect references to same-sex partnerships?
Busuttil says the candidates’ proviso to their signature is that while pledging to fight against discrimination (he points out the PN were the first to legislate against gay discrimination in employment), they are holding on to their definition of marriage.
But he adds the PN is supporting cohabitation rights for both opposite- and same-sex couples, and that this pledge “is nothing new”.
“Lawrence Gonzi made it in the last election and he is committed to it. We want to tell MGRM there’s a lot we agree upon and that we should concentrate on those points. Unfortunately they are more focused on attacking on our votes on our red lines, rather than on cooperation – I hope they will support us when we come to propose these type of things.”
But isn’t this pledge on cohabitation the same one promised back in 1998, when Gonzi was PN secretary general and soon after social policy minister? Isn’t the PN taking voters for a ride, 10 years in the making?
Busuttil absconds himself with a somewhat unsatisfactory reply, given the PN’s overdue promise: “I did not even exist in 1998.” 
He adds that the pledge had been renewed in a pre-electoral meeting he had last year with Louis Galea and Joe Saliba with the MGRM, and that reference to this was even inserted in the President’s speech.
So could he convince his party’s government to move forward on this pledge?
“Not as an MEP. The EU has no competence on these matters. It’s a process that must evolve in Malta according to the parties’ political will. I’m in favour – and when you think the PN is traditionally the conservative party, this is a big step forward. It shows that in reality, the conservative party is not the PN. It’s Labour.”
I ask Busuttil where he thinks Labour has made its conservative turn.
“Immigration,” he affirms with confidence. “It screams it out. See the positions Labour took on immigration and forget the name ‘Labour’, and you realise this is a right-wing party talking, if not far-right: a party exhorting you to ignore international obligations is something that usually emerges from a far-right party.”
However, Busuttil himself was criticised for his rhetoric on immigration, by none other than anthropologist Ranier Fsadni, head of PN think-tank AZAD, on his stand on giving migrants voting rights. In a nutshell, Busuttil attacked Labour over their European counterparts’ amendment to his report on the common immigration policy, to give migrants (referred as long-term and legally resident) to be given voting rights in local council elections. Cue the racist backlash in the letters’ pages of the press. 
According to Fsadni, Busuttil’s reference to the amendment as “controversial” was in such ‘careful wording (as to) easily pander to the idea that legal migrants are a social danger and ought not to be granted any civic rights’.
Does he feel somewhat responsible for creating this false impression?
“Not at all. These amendments – if you check the EP report – usually make reference to ‘immigrants’ without specifying whether they are legal or illegal… It’s not the first time it could be a vague reference.”
Indeed the final report itself states that “migrants” should be given “opportunities” to vote in elections – but in no way does it specify “illegal immigrants” (which ultimately means somebody who is pending deportation, with no right of stay). More to the point, the MEP who presented the amendment, Catherine Boursier, presented a more specific amendment to the report outlining which migrants could vote (“the right of long-term residents to vote in local elections”) and in another amendment to give “migrants opportunities for democratic participation… to vote in local elections”.
Put entirely, it does not preclude member states from setting their own rules for which sort of migrant should be eligible to vote. 
But Busuttil attacked the amendment in parliament from the start, while Labour MEPs John Attard Montalto and Louis Grech did not take up the exemplary stand of their European colleagues, and presented a dry statement to the EP saying they did not agree with voting rights for illegal immigrants “because of Malta’s demographic situation”.
“My criticism of voting rights for immigrants, be they legal, is that it is in itself controversial,” Busuttil tells me. “In such a report as mine, which I believe contains 99% positive content, the amendment risked undermining the consensus on the report. Why should such a sensitive matter that could divide us be brought up? We should have left it out. I spoke to Louis Grech to convince the PES to leave out such a paragraph. In no way did I want this to appear right-wing…”
But this was not a case of Busuttil appearing ‘right-wing’. Politically, he used his vague reference to immigrants voting to hit out at Labour MEPs on their hawkish immigration stand at home, contrasted with the progressive stand of their socialist colleagues in the EP.
But what seeped from the maelstrom of accusations into voters’ ears was painted perfectly by Ranier Fsadni: ‘he made it sound like the bigots were right’. Wasn’t Busuttil aware of the ramifications of his statements?
“My argument was that when I needed them to convince the PES not to introduce something that will complicate a report so important to Malta, the Labour MEPs were not able to do this.”
Additionally, Busuttil states there were four instances “in which Labour’s MEPs voted differently on voting rights for immigrants – once in favour, twice abstaining, and finally on my report, voting against.”
Clearly, Busuttil drives the point home that ‘progressive’ was a word which Labour’s MEPs have mislaid back in Brussels. Politically he is shrewd enough to exploit their weakness inside the PES at convincing their colleagues to take impossible stands on immigration – because their traditional voting behaviour is far removed from the PL’s hawkish domestic policy.
“My party’s stand on this matter is that only foreign citizens of the EU should have the right to vote in local councils and European Parliament elections, because only they reciprocate this right with Maltese citizens. The British were afforded the same right before EU accession on the strength of a reciprocal agreement established within the Commonwealth,” Busuttil says.
“We cannot entertain giving the vote to non-EU citizens at this stage of our political development, be they Russians or Africans. After all, this is a matter of reciprocity and this only exists within the EU.”
I am surprised however, that after Busuttil addressed the EP on the Pinar standoff between Italy and Malta – in which he described Italy’s attempt to offload immigrants on Malta as “shameful” and “unacceptable” and even hailed that rule of law had prevailed “over the law of the jungle” (when the migrants were rightly taken by Italy) – he supports Italy’s forced repatriation policy: which was effectively the end-result of the Italo-Maltese altercation.
“I agree with it because I think it is legal, and for us it is a possibility to break the mafia that is putting these people’s lives in danger. I prefer to see someone apply for protection in Libya than letting him risk his life to come to Europe to do the same. That’s why I don’t understand UNHCR’s incoherent position; it seems to be saying that it’s better to let them risk their lives and apply in Europe – when what UNHCR should so is beef up its Tripoli operations, get Libya to ratify the Geneva Convention, and process asylum applications and allocate a country of resettlement for them.”
Interestingly, Busuttil argues that since the migrants get intercepted in the high seas there is “no community law or national law” to be applied in these cases. So does this mean that migrants are left afloat in a sea of lawlessness? Busuttil argues that there is “no innocent safe passage” in the case of migrants attempting to enter a country illegally.
Although I am sure he will find other lawyers to debate him on this point, doesn’t repatriation punish asylum seekers who potentially have a clear case for refugee protection? Busuttil reaffirms his position: “we want to break down the mafia that is capitalising on this trafficking, to convince migrants it is useless to pay $1,000 to risk their lives at sea.”
The Vatican thinks otherwise about Italy’s policy, of course, but even the Nationalists are not the conservatives of yesteryear perhaps. 
“I’m very conscious of this criticism,” Busuttil says, “but I have to make a difference between the Church’s responsibility and that of a government that has to govern.”

MaltaToday: Gonzi breaks another promise

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/05/31/evarist.html

31.5.9 by Evarist Bartolo

Just a few months after scraping through the last general election with the solemn promise that public medical services would be “among the best in the world and free” Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi gave the go-ahead to a report for his Cabinet to introduce fees in the primary healthcare system and start charging also for vaccination and screening programmes.
This goes totally contrary to what Gonzi’s government declared in its electoral manifesto and in the address on the occasion of the opening of parliament just over a year ago by President Fenech Adami: “Health is a key element in human development. Mater Dei Hospital will continue to be the pivotal point of the National Health Service, which will carry on providing quality care at no charge.”

Practically everyone will have to register with a private doctor to be referred for care in public hospitals. The policy document prepared for Gonzi’s government states: “Fees shall be determined by the free market and the Government will not intervene to set fees for consultation with a health professional and will not regulate the fee structure as it strongly believes that the free market should establish such fees.”

There will also be full or partial charges for vaccine, screening and other programmes. The policy document admits that the reforms are a radical departure from previous attempts to change the National Health Service as they do away with “the concept of a totally free medical primary healthcare.”

The policy document states: “Previous attempts at reforming the sector were all based, in one way or another, upon the premise that the State would continue to directly offer a family doctor or general practitioner service, thus continuing to sustain the sector, incurring significant costs…”
Just a few months before this report was drawn up and discussed in Cabinet, Dr Gonzi had the cheek during the last general election campaign to sanctimoniously demand an apology from then Labour leader Alfred Sant, who had accused Gonzi of planning to introduce charges in the National Health Service by stealth.

In the midst of the March 2008 campaign and speaking against the backdrop of Mater Dei Hospital, Dr Gonzi repeatedly “insisted that his government never planned to introduce fees or payments for healthcare, and it never would for as long as he was a Prime Minister.”
Dr Sant had also produced a confidential report prepared for Gonzi’s government about the introduction of charges in the National Health Service. Like he did then, Gonzi tried to deny the existence of such a report but when Joseph Muscat showed him a copy he had to admit that it exists. He then tried to wriggle his way out by saying that he was not committed to carrying it out!

An honest person who had given his word that as long as he remains Prime Minister, fees or payments would never be charged for public healthcare would never have given the go-ahead for such a report to be drawn up and discussed in Cabinet, as it is premised on the principle that basic national health services like primary health care, national vaccine and screening programmes would not remain free like before. Working and middle-class families and pensioners who already find it very difficult to make ends meet with a high cost of living, painful water and electricity bills and too many taxes will suffer more if they have to start pay for healthcare.

In last year’s election campaign Gonzi said it was only under the PN that the people could be assured that there would be no charges for health services. He is now going back on his promise. Gonzi has consistently promised one thing and did the exact opposite. He promised bird trappers and hunters they would continue to enjoy their pastime for ever. He promised shipyard workers he had no plans to downsize the shipyards and their job was guaranteed, they would earn more money at the shipyard and pay lower taxes. He did the same thing with GO plc workers and also those who work in the public, private and taxi service. Even nurses, doctors and teachers feel deceived by him.

In this election campaign Gonzi is again doing the rounds, promising heaven on earth or finding excuses for not having kept his promises: like the pathetic attempt to say that he never deceived the bird trappers and hunters as he did his best to protect their pastime but the European Union let him down. Even the gay movement has again been promised that discrimination will be removed against them, when a few weeks ago Deputy Prime Minister Tonio Borg had such an anti-gay outburst in parliament! Gonzi promised green public procurement policies and positive discrimination in favour of those who offer superior environment services and has now accepted that the new power station will be operated on the dirty technology of heavy fuel oil producing 50 tonnes of toxic waste every day.

Gonzi has brought our politics into disrepute by promising one thing and delivering the opposite. In the March 2008 general election the majority of voters showed that they did not trust him and in fact voted for the Partit Laburista and the other small parties. In next Saturday’s local council and European Parliament elections he deserves a bigger majority that shows that he cannot be trusted in running the country.

Note: You can listen to Tonio Borg's speech here.

Police letter regarding the book The Catholic Church and Homosexuality

[Click on image to enlarge.]

All communications should be addressed to the Commissioner of Police and not to individual Officers by name or appointment. 

Police General Headquarters Floriana - Malta.
28/04/2009
Our Ref. P662/09

Dr Ing Patrick Attard
[Address]

Dear Dr Ing Patrick Attard

Reference is being made to your letter dated 9th February 2009; regarding the Book "The Catholic Church and Homosexuality".

Following your letter, the Police checked with the Media Centre about this book and it was established that no more copies are in circulation of the mentioned book since they only had two copies.

Furthermore the Police cannot take any criminal action against those persons who simply put this book on the bookshelves.

Kind regards

Yours Sincerely

[Signed]

Dr Dominic Micallef BA LLD
Police Superintendent

[P. Attard's Note: I would like to thank the Maltese Police for their work. I would also like to take the opportunity to encourage our law-makers to make incitement of hatred against gays and transgendered (Homophobia and Transphobia) a punishable act.]

---

Related Articles/Video Clips (Listed chronologically):

Dr. Ing. Patrick Attard condemns Catholic Book - Homosexuality is diabolic - AIDS is the punishment to sodomites (9.2.9)

Malta Today: Taking it seriously (11.2.9)

L-Orizzont: Ktieb li qed jinbiegħ mingħand “il-Qarrej Nisrani”.… Ferment fost il-komunità tal-omosesswali (12.2.9)

PRESS RELEASE: The Head of the Catholic-Church's Media Centre should resign (14.2.9)

L-Orizzont: Irtirat il-ktieb Nisrani b'mibgħeda għall-Gays - Patrick Attard jgħid li din l-azzjoni mhix biżżejjed (14.2.9)

Times: Blog - SO MANY LIBERALS, SO LITTLE SPACE (14.2.9)

Times: Protest over book sold at Church media centre (14.2.9)

It-Torċa: Il-każ tal-ktieb “The Catholic Church and Homosexuality” - Mitluba r-riżenja tal-Kap tal-Media Centre (15.2.9)

Reporter: Dr Inġ. Patrick Attard and Mgr Anton Gouder (Screened on 12 & 13.3.9)

---
See also the following programs in Maltese. 

Open the links with Windows Media Player or Real Player.

DISSETT, TVM 17.2.09: Archbishop talks about the withdrawal of a book

mms://194.158.37.72/TVM/disset/090217.wmv       

[Scroll to: 1h 17]

XARABANK, TVM 20.2.09: Censorship and Gay-Hate books

mms://194.158.37.72/TVM/Xarabank/090220.wmv  

[Scroll to: 1h 14]