Labour and the EU accession treaty: the facts
I wish to clear up a falsehood that has been gaining ground over the last few days: that Labour voted in favour of the EU accession treaty.
Labour did not. They voted against. From what I gather, Joseph Muscat sought to give the opposite impression on television last night and his words have been disseminated again by L-Orizzont this morning.
Here are the facts.
The EU Accession Treaty had to be approved by parliament – as a bill – just like any other treaty. Before the bill came before parliament there was a referendum, which returned a Yes vote, immediately followed by a general election, which returned the Nationalist Party to government with a mandate to take Malta into the European Union.
The situation was not exactly comparable to today’s situation with the divorce referendum, because there was a general election between the referendum and the parliamentary vote, and so strictly speaking parliament was not being asked to decide on a decision taken by the people in the referendum because the general election had superseded that.
I say ‘strictly speaking’ because this is casuistry, and it is the argument Alfred Sant and Joseph Muscat used to justify the Labour Party’s vote against the treaty: that, as with votes on matters contained in a party electoral programme in a general election, this was a constituency matter and they were representing their constituents in voting against it – because their constituents had voted against the Nationalist Party programme, including that part on EU membership.
Joseph Muscat wrote about it for The Sunday Times and for L-Orizzont back then, saying that he believes Labour should vote against the EU accession treaty.
In reality, the general election was only necessary because Alfred Sant declared that he did not acknowledge the result of the referendum.
So on July 14, 2003, when parliament voted on the EU accession treaty, Labour voted against, and then asked for a division. This means an itemised count of the votes (more about how this works in my next post).
The result was 34 in favour (all the Nationalist MPs except for one who was absent) and 25 against (all Labour MPs except for five who were absent).
6 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Thank you for clarifying this because I couldn’t recollect exactly what happened.
I was a highly paid consultant.
My recommendations on a report were the result of years of experience and pain-staking analysis.
When I came to Malta, I found people would ignore my recommendations (let’s say that of options A and B I would recommend A, then they would choose B for no apparent reason).
This never bothered me much as I still got paid.
However, one time I thought it vital that they chose option B so I recommended option A and gambled they would ignore me and chose B. Thankfully they did.
I don’t know how this relates to the situation under discussion, but I thought I would give you a chuckle.
Gonzi said there will be divorce after the Yes vote.
I believe him.
How we get there is going to provide much amusement.
Even worse: You recommend option A or B, and they choose C, because that’s the one they want to hear.
Yesterday Muscat on TX was all over the place trying to make ends meet. He came across as being very concerned – could he have had a previous heated discussion with Marie Louise Coleiro Preca?
She said that she informed Joseph Muscat of her decision on Tuesday.
Adrian Vassallo said he will vote against divorce “even if he gets kicked out of the party.” Who knows, maybe he knows something about the circumstances of Marie Louise Coleiro Preca’s decision not to stand again that we were not told?