MEP says government keeping pre-referendum promise

Nationalist member of the European Parliament Simon Busuttil said yesterday that in implementing the Birds Directive the government was honouring the promises it made before the EU referendum.

Dr Busuttil was replying to a question put to him at a discussion held in Valletta yesterday evening, where he spoke alongside Labour MEP John Attard Montalto.

Entitled the European Parliament And Maltese Traditions - Hunting, Fireworks And Cultural Projects, the debate was poorly attended.

The discussion's moderator, Natalino Fenech, asked what Dr Busuttil had to say about the claim that a promise he had made as head of the Malta-EU Information Centre (MIC) - that hunting in spring would not cease after Malta becomes an EU member - was not being kept.

Dr Busuttil replied that as head of MIC, his job was not to make promises but to inform the public on the consequences of membership, and what the EU and the government had been negotiating.

He insisted that what he had said was correct and he had no qualms with repeating it now.

Hunting in spring is banned in the European Union even if Malta, which is often under the EU's spotlight for reported abuse by hunters and a potential breach of the Birds Directive, had asked for a derogation before membership.

The Nationalist MEP said that the EU's hunting laws that Malta had implemented were the harshest restrictions ever introduced in the country, even if the EU laws gave limited possibilities for hunting in spring.

However, Dr Busuttil emphasised, the rules in place today are much harsher than those introduced by Stanley Zammit, a former PN parliamentary secretary responsible for the environment who served before 1996, and who was not re-elected after introducing strict laws on hunting.

It was in this context that hunting in spring had to be tackled, he said, adding that since the referendum, Maltese hunters have been allowed to hunt for successive springs.

"The government has to pay a political price even with those who oppose hunting. Yet even environmentalists knew what was negotiated before the referendum, and they voted for membership. Morally, therefore, the onus is on the government but on all those who voted in favour of membership," Dr Busuttil said.

On the other end, hunters would be shooting themselves in the foot if they flaunt the regulations, he said, and each incident of abuse would be a day closer to the end of hunting in spring.

Dr Attard Montalto said much of Malta's notoriety on hunting was "wider than we actually merit". He said it is unfair that the spotlight was constantly on Malta when there were similar problems in other EU regions.

He said that after speaking to hunters' representatives, he had realised they were different from what they are portrayed. The real issue was how abusing hunters should be held accountable for their actions.

"The best way is for hunters to regularise themselves, but we all know that the last person who will report a lawyer's abuse is another lawyer," Dr Attard Montalto said.

He added that because hunters carried firearms the matter was more complicated than usual, as whistleblowers who report abuse would find themselves in a "sensitive" position.

Dr Attard Montalto said that in dealing with hunting, no government should favour either lobby, because this would turn one section of the population, be it the environmentalists or the hunters, against the European project.