Simon Busuttil has just announced that he will vote yes in the referendum which is asking voters to decide whether Malta should keep the derogation given for limited spring hunting before our accession to the European Union.  He said that as one of those who negotiated this derogation and as part of a government who defended it since then, even in the European Court of Justice, he could not vote against it now.

He could have logically voted against only if he would have reached the conclusion that experience has shown that it was not possible to have a limited hunting season. It seems that he still believes that the majority of hunters are law abiding citizens while it is only a small but unruly minority which believes that it is above the law. During today’s press conference Busuttil showed the red card to these offenders.

Prime Minister Muscat had already declared that he would be voting to keep the derogation negotiated by the Nationalist government. Given the repeated pre-electoral hanky-panky between the Partit Laburisa and the hunters Muscat could not but vote yes. As he himself said his statement should not have surprised anyone.

Quite naturally the hunters would – given a chance -  ask for more; perhaps they were promised more, much more. Or perhaps they were given to understand that there would be more. But now, at least, officially the choice is between the hated derogation or nothing.  If the hunters win the referendum the unruly minority will be strengthened. It will come back for more with a vengeance – an important consideration that voters should not forget. Though legislation proposing disproportionately exaggerated fines to anyone killing protected species has been mooted by government they will still believe that they could get away with their illegal practices.

Does the fact that both political leaders will vote to keep the derogation mean that the referendum is done and dusted? I don’t think so. I think that the contrary could be the case.

Remember the divorce referendum. When Dr Muscat, then Leader of the Opposition, waded in strongly for the pro-divorce lobby he carried with him the party machinery, particularly the media, and many Labour voters who did not want to please the Nationalists.

It is reliably understood that when the Prime Minister came in favour of spring hunting the polls moved in that direction. Had Dr Busuttil taken a position contrary to that of the Prime Minister the movement would have been much greater. Now that both leaders will vote yes it means that one can cross the party line without ipaxxi the opponent, as the opponent is in a similar (if not the same) boat. The vote is now just for or against sprint hunting not for or against Muscat or Busuttil.

I think that Busuttil’s decision to vote yes neutralised the possibly escalation political polarisation about the referendum. His decision is the best thing that could have happened to the no vote.

These two ayes will probably mean more noes.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.