Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/444527
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 11 JANUARY 2015 10 The hunting lobby: endgame for the FKNK? For the hunting lobby led by the militant Federazzjoni Nassaba Konservazzjonisti (FKNK) a defeat in the anti spring hunting referen- dum will signify an epochal event which will put an end to their pow- er to blackmail politicians on both sides as they have done since the 1996 election, in which the lobby had signed an electoral pact with Labour. Present leaders of the hunting lobby such as Lino Farrugia will be blamed for failing to prevent a catastrophic re- sult for the lobby. More moderate ele- ments may take over to ensure that extremists do not endanger the autumn season. One fundamental choice for the hunt- ing lobby is whether to boycott the referendum or to actively campaign for a no vote. The hunting lobby may bank on voting fatigue on referendum day and the fact that hunting is not a do or die is- sue for most voters. In those localities where local elections will not be taking place, hunters may scare off voters by being visibly present in front of polling booths, taking note of who turns up to vote. This could deter some people from voting. But it could also be counter productive in a modern democratic society. Campaigning actively for a no vote would be the honour- able thing to do. Hunters may choose to present rational arguments in favour of sustainable hunting, such as by pointing out that the hunting of quails and turtledoves does not in itself significantly en- danger bird popula- tions. They may try to put the argument on a more rational plane as environ- mentalists resort to emotions in a bid to mobilise voters. They may also make an effort to send an un- equivocal message to the electorate of zero tolerance towards illegal poaching. Yet voters may see through this campaign having realised that it is the spring hunting season which offers a good cover for the il- legal activities of illegal poach- ers. In the absence of this cover it will be much easier for the police to spot hunters breaking the law. One major advantage for the hunting lobby is that the referen- dum will be taking place before the next spring hunting season. This means that the pro hunting campaign will not be marred by incidents during the open sea- son. Moreover hunters will be highly motivated to vote against the abolition of spring hunting as it would that this year's season will not open. If they manage to thwart the referendum hunters would have accomplished an incredible feat, which would further strengthen the power of their lobby group. Their power over political par- ties would become even stronger than before. Probably illegal poachers will also be emboldened to continue with their criminal activities as before. BirdLife and environmentalists: A Maltese spring? In the case of a victory BirdLife would have accomplished one of its historical aims, that of en- suring that Malta abides by EU legislation, which bans spring hunting. But a defeat would be catastrophic for the bird protection lobby. Politi- cians would read this as a sign that the electorate does not care about birds and the environmentalists in general. Moreover the govern- ment may also conclude that if the environmental- ists can be defeated on hunt- ing, an issue where they can appeal to emotions, they can be rolled over on far less emo- tional issues such as land reclama- tion, the Gozo airstrip and land use policies. On the other hand a yes victory could signal the birth of a hegem- onic block opposed to the govern- ment's current environmental pol- icies and to subservience to certain lobbies. The PN's stance in the referen- dum will determine its relationship with this civil society movement. It would also mean that apart from the parliamentary opposition, the government would be facing a vibrant civil society, which on its own can bring about change. This may herald the advent of a Maltese spring where civil society can emerge as a political protago- nist with a stake in determining the agenda of the country. The government may become more reluctant to anger environ- mental NGOs and their sup- porters, whose votes will no longer be taken for granted. Ensuring a 51% quorum will be a major challenge for the coalition against spring hunting. The coalition may also lack the resources to mount an effective cam- paign even if it can rely on the editorial support of Malta's three main English newspapers. But it needs to get its act in order to mobilise the electorate on an is- sue low in its agenda of priorities. Joseph Muscat: Will he take a back seat? A victory for the coalition against spring hunting in the ref- erendum would mean that spring hunting will be abolished on his watch despite having signed a pre- electoral pact with hunters aimed at improving their situation. This may invite criticism from hunters that he did not do much to help their cause despite pre- electoral promises. Hunters know News Spring hunting referendum: James Debono looks at what is at stake for the main protagonists of the referendum, namely the hunting lobby, BirdLife, the wider environmental movement, the government, the Nationalist Party and the Greens, and finds out that the stakes are high for everyone. Lino Farrugia, FKNK chief executive Steve Micklewright, BirdLife Malta executive director Prime Minister Joseph Muscat