The consequences of a Yes victory

Recent polls have shown that although unlikely, a victory of the hunting lobby in the referendum is far from impossible.

The latest MaltaToday poll shows the No vote is leading by 7 points but a poll held some weeks before showed the Yes leading by a point. 

All previous polls showed a strong majority of over 50% against spring hunting. This shows that a majority of Maltese are genuinely against spring hunting. But over the past weeks many are hesitating either for partisan considerations (principally Labour voters who follow the leader) or because they do not want to deprive family members, work colleagues or friends of their hobby.

A Yes victory is possible in the  following scenario: if presently undecided Labour voters decide to vote yes and if there is a particularly low turnout among those opposed to spring hunting.

So in view of this possibility it is important to consider the wider implications of a Yes victory.

Voting to allow hunters to shoot at birds while on their way to breeding grounds, defies the most basic ecological sensitivities.

The first implication is that the Maltese would have sent a strong message to their own politicians and to the European Union that nature conservation is not so important for them. Voting to allow hunters to shoot at birds while on their way to breeding grounds, defies the most basic ecological sensitivities. 

The second implication is that the environmentalist movement would have been defeated on an issue where it had strong public support.  If environmentalists are defeated on such a highly emotional issue, they have little chance of mobilising public support to protect underwater posidonia meadows or garigue from mega-projects.

The message sent by a Yes victory to government and the developers’ lobby is that the greens are a spent force. Moreover if defeated on this one, green NGOs will be licking their wounds for years and the present government will feel emboldened to press ahead in its plans to turn Malta into an imitation of Dubai.

The third implication is that the Maltese would have legitimised the blackmail of the hunters’ lobby on both political parties, which is so strong that so far only one MP has declared herself against spring hunting. A Yes victory will not only encourage the present government to renew its pre-electoral pact with hunters but would encourage the opposition to do the same before the next election.

After a Yes victory, expect the political class to become even more accommodating to the lobby, which they will come to fear more than ever before. Just imagine the strength of bullish lobby legitimised by a democratic vote.  For if hunters manage to turn this round, they will gain a reputation for invincibility.

The hunting lobby will not be satisfied with keeping hunting in spring. Ever since Dom Mintoff  introduced legislation which restricted hunting to particular seasons – putting an end to all year round hunting sprees – the hunting lobby has been using its political leverage to oppose any further restrictions like those introduced by parliamentary secretary Stanley Zammit in the mid-1990s. If victorious they will be on a rampage, demanding more and more concessions from a morally bankrupt political class.

After a Yes victory, expect the political class to become even more accommodating to the lobby, which they will come to fear more than ever before.

The fourth implication is that some hunters may feel free to celebrate their victory by shooting at anything which flies in the sky. While not all hunters break the law, it is well known that a sizeable number of hunters enjoy the thrill of shooting protected species. Moreover, an activity which revolves around killing birds with a shotgun is bound to attract unsavoury types who simply like the killing part.  As a hunter aptly wrote on Facebook “on the 11th April we vote, on the 12th April we celebrate and on the 13th we shoot.” 

But while the ultimate consequence of the Yes victory will be that we will be living in a country where might is right, the consequence of a No victory may well be the advent of a Maltese spring where an unprecedented civil society alliance emerges triumphant over both the hunting lobby and the political class.  

Let us not forget that this is the first time that the Maltese people have used their right to call for a referendum to cancel a law which both political parties have upheld simply to satisfy the hunting lobby. 

The fact that the Maltese have stood up to be counted despite the reluctance of the political class to act will signify a historic moment and a victory of people's power.