A week after announcing he is to be a Democratic Party candidate on the PN ticket, Godfrey Farrugia speaks out about his reasons for quitting Labour and sounds a warning on abortion. 

Is it true that your resignation from the PL and the decision to contest with the PD was due to pressure from your partner, Marlene, who heads the party?

I am a self-made man. I am my own man. The decision was not easy. In the last four years, I have worked tirelessly for the government and the people with a sense of a loyalty, both as Health Minister and as Whip. My decision came after two years in which I continuously flagged up the flawed leadership and worked to safeguard Labour’s social values and pro-life stance. When I resigned as whip, I was still convinced we could make amends for our mistakes in the last year of this legislature. There are people around Dr Muscat who, despite their mistakes have not been removed.

To whom are you referring?

Keith Schembri. Good governance, which is the foundation of Labour’s 2013 manifesto and the basis all its proposals, was crucial. We are at a crossroads, and the country cannot afford to have a further five years of flawed leadership, as the ones who will suffer most will be workers and vulnerable people. I have always called a spade a spade. In 2013, I ran on the PL ticket as I truly believed the country needed a change.

The timing of your candidature suggested it was part of a PN plan, as it was announced on the eve of the PN’s mass meeting in your hometown of Żebbuġ, which you eventually addressed. It also followed Marlene Farrugia’s decision not to contest on the seventh district. Were these coincidences not one too many?

I only made up my mind on Friday, May 12, when I was attending a band march on the occasion of the liturgical feast of St Philip, the patron saint of Żebbuġ. Marlene had no influence on my decision. When it comes to politics, we have always led separate lives.  Having the third party in Parliament is healthy for the country, as it will keep the bigger coalition partner in check to ensure good governance.

Your body language at the PN’s headquarters soon after announcing your candidature, which dominated the Sunday papers, left many wondering whether you were already regretting your move. Why were you so emotional?

My presence there was by pure coincidence, as the coalition parties happened to be launching their team of candidates on the same day on which I submitted my nomination. The first person who greeted me happened to be Opposition Whip David Agius, whom I had at times put in an awkward position to defend the PL’s parliamentary agenda, at times by unnecessary procrastination.

Though that was part of the political game, when I saw his expression I could not restrain my feelings.

In your Facebook message soon after submitting your nomination, you said you wanted to heal the country. From what?

The country has a sick leadership and needs good governance which truly places people’s interests first. My wish has always been not to have any dark clouds casting shadows over Castille and to have the country’s various watchdogs function properly.  Unfortunately, in the last year, I have not seen this happening in the police, the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit or Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority, which did not do enough in terms of medicine prices and accommodation rent rates.

Were other Labour MPs thinking about leaving the party or calling a vote of confidence in Joseph Muscat in the weeks prior to his decision to call an early election?

There were significant rumblings when the Panama Papers scandal broke and when the Opposition filed a no-confidence vote against Konrad Mizzi. At the time, I made it clear I would have resigned, and I was not the only one of this opinion. Others were also dissatisfied but took a step back from expressing their views.

Why did you say that Dr Muscat had betrayed the PL’s historic ideals and that the party lost its moral fibre?

We reached this stage when we started calling “right” what is factually wrong.

Can you give an example?

This happened when somebody very close to the Prime Minister was repeatedly flagged up for his conduct. I would not have been able to do house visits knowing that this would ultimately serve to strengthen his position. Those at the top should lead by example. Though such deeds have happened in the past, we never witnessed them on such a scale and in such a blatant manner. As one of my constituents put it, if I had been seen knocking on a prostitute’s door, nobody would have believed that my intention was to get a cup of coffee.

Though the PN’s time in Opposition was relatively short, I believe that it learnt its lesson

You said you had voted against your conscience on several occasions. Why did you not leave the PL before?

I was the government’s Whip and represented the collegiality of the parliamentary group.

Which votes were you referring to?

The first case was the no-confidence vote against Konrad Mizzi filed by the Opposition.  My conscience told me to vote against Dr Mizzi, but I decided to give him a second chance in the wake of the suffering his family was going through. I considered that the Prime Minister took some sort of punitive measure in his regard by stripping him of the deputy leadership and the energy and health portfolios. I also decided to forgive him.

This happened another couple of times, including the motion to suspend Labour MP Joe Debono Grech for the disparaging remarks he made against Marlene.

But how could you vote against your partner on such an issue?

That shows my loyalty to the party and disproves the claims that she influences my decisions.

Did you at least voice your disapproval internally?

Yes. Regrettably, there were other MPs who used to complain behind the leadership’s back but never had the guts to face the Prime Minister. I never shied away from voicing my frank views and never tried to eulogise Dr Muscat to get something in return. The only exceptions, when I did not communicate, were when I resigned as a minister and then as the Whip, as that was my own decision.

What was the straw that broke the camel’s back?

Two reasons mainly. The flawed leadership and the double standards on issues relating to the value of human life, whereby policies were not reflecting Labour’s declared pro-life stance.

You started off in this legislature as Health Minister, but you resigned to pre-empt the Prime Minister’s decision. What went wrong?

One of the first things I did as a minister was to take a snapshot of the public health service, the first such exercise since 1999, to have a detailed breakdown of the recurrent expenditure for budgeting purposes. I drafted a month-by-month roadmap. By August 2013, we had already reached an agreement with Barts, which was signed through a notarial act in January 2014.

As a minister, I also addressed the out-of-stock medicines issue, and in just nine months, the list was brought down from 182 to 35. Measures were also taken to centralise the storage of medicines and save money.

With hindsight, I can understand why I was not being viewed in a good light, as I was trying to increase accountability and get good value for money.

Was your departure from the Cabinet related to disagreement with the controversial hospital privatisation plans?

There were already plans for a public-private partnership, but two months before I resigned, there were already hints that I would be given another ministry. I cannot say whether this reshuffle would have been part of a plan to get me out of the way for the introduction of the Vitals Global Healthcare agreement.

Did you get the impression that the Prime Minister was not satisfied with your performance, especially after what was described as the “hospital tent gaffe”?

The tent was set up on the advice of Mater Dei Hospital management as a form of reception, in response to an influenza outbreak, when the hospital was already at full capacity with patients in the corridors. In turn, the reception area was to be used to transfer patients from the day surgery section to have more space.

This was only a temporary measure meant to avoid cancelling day surgery operations.

No patients would have been treated in the tent.

With hindsight, don’t you think this was a mistake?

As a minister, I shouldered the responsibility. Such a measure has also been adopted abroad in times of crisis.

Did you encounter direct interference from Castille?

There were ways and means through which the Office the Prime Minister communicated with the media, and there were officials tasked to coordinate matters. Though we worked as a team, with hindsight I realise that there were individuals who had resorted to all measures to get rid of me.

Following the 2014 reshuffle, your photo with the Prime Minister at Girgenti Palace did anything but convey a message of unity. What is your relationship with Joseph Muscat now?

I was offered both the Social Policy and the Environment ministries, but I refused, as I did not like the attitude of the Prime Minister and his aides.

What kind of attitude?

I mean, having a close aide of the Prime Minister who tries to interfere in your work.

Are you referring to Keith Schembri?

Persons in high positions close to the Prime Minister.

Have there been attempts from the Prime Minister’s side to bring you back to the Labour fold?

The Prime Minister replied to the letter announcing my resignation as whip and expressed his disappointment that I had not consulted with him on the matter. In the preceding 12 days, during the Easter recess, I was sick, while Dr Muscat had various commitments in connection with the EU Council presidency.

He was also disappointed as the letter was sent to all members of the parliamentary group and not just him.

How did Dr Muscat react when you used to express your dissatisfaction?

The Prime Minister always listened and gave me his attention, but ultimately, he takes the decisions. What is wrong is wrong, two wrongs don’t make a right, and trying to conceal mistakes from the people is no solution.

There were other MPs who used to complain behind the leadership’s back but never had the guts to face the Prime Minister

You also expressed serious doubts about the party’s pro-life stance. Why?

I have always championed the right to life. When you start noticing organs within the PL expressing views against this value, you realise that not everybody is on the same wavelength. The government also ignored the recommendations on the morning-after pill, and the very first pill introduced in the market was an abortive one. The people were deceived.  At present, a man can buy the MAP and force a woman to take it.

Instead, we should have adopted a system whereby a woman needs to consult a doctor, as this might help her in the long term for issues on contraception or venereal diseases and even help her to choose what type of pill to buy.

I also have deep reservations about Dr Muscat’s statement regarding embryo freezing.

Why?

I was in the UK receiving treatment when, for the first time ever, I heard the Prime Minister expressing his view in favour of embryo freezing, contrary to what he had said before the 2013 election.

This prompted me to write him a long letter, in which I outlined my position and stated that technology cannot yet guarantee that all embryos will be saved. On thawing, a certain percentage, albeit low, dies. This is apart from other issues like the length of time for which these embryos remain frozen. This is the fulcrum of the debate.

I challenge every politician to contradict me, as I said in November last year in Parliament, that abortion will be legalised, through the European regulations framework as well as Maltese law, once embryo freezing is allowed.

Abortion will be introduced through the evolution of the legal set-up regulating this sector. Life starts at conception, and as a doctor, I safeguard this principle.

This does not mean I harbour conservative views, as I am in favour of a gamete donation service under certain safeguards for both mother and child.

What was the content of your letter to the Prime Minister?

I proposed giving certain rights to mother and child in cases of rape, as part of the domestic violence Bill.

The idea was to have social penalties for the perpetrator while stripping him of certain rights and giving additional powers to the mother and child.

However, the reception given to these proposals by a minister conveyed the message the government was not interested in taking them on board.

Are you saying that you are not convinced by the assurance given last Wednesday by the Prime Minister that abortion is not on Labour’s agenda?

Not convinced at all. He was against embryo freezing before 2013 but changed his stance in favour in 2015. I am certain, even from the discussion within the Embryo Protection Agency on the way forward, that embryo freezing will be introduced.

The natural consequence will be the introduction of abortion.

Experience shows that very few candidates who have switched parties are elected, because voters do no trust them. Why are you confident of making it to Parliament once again?

I did not switch my ideals. I still believe in Malta tagħna lkoll. The Democratic Party will give a new lease of life to politics. We will guarantee good governance, and Simon Busuttil’s politics of consensus stands a very good chance of reaching this objective.

Throughout this legislature I remained loyal and did not deceive the people. We believe in colourless politics, and the ultimate target is to implement what was supposed to be happening under the Labour government.  The fact that the Prime Minister called an early election during the EU presidency when the economy was doing well is a testament that something was wrong.

But a coalition government could be a recipe for disaster and political instability, especially if the PD holds the balance of power in a one-seat majority government.

The last two legislatures showed that even when there was no coalition government, there was still political instability. A coalition will strengthen, in the people’s name, the guarantees of good governance. This is the disease we need to cure.

What makes today’s PN different from the party you fiercely worked to dethrone in the last election?

In the last couple of years, the Labour government could have made amends for its own mistakes but did not. Though the PN’s time in Opposition was relatively short, I believe that it learnt its lesson. I believe people will be able to make a clear distinction on who is fit to lead the country.

If you are elected, are you willing to accept a ministry? What is your preference?

I handle decisions on a day-by-day basis. I leave this issue to the providence of St Philip.