Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/448091
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 18 JANUARY 2015 Opinion 22 Opinion Hunting has flown beyond I have to admit I have changed my opinion on at least one aspect of the spring hunting issue. I used to think political parties were somehow 'indebted' to the electorate to take up clear policy positions on all matters of public concern. In fact, I used to think this was part of their entire raison d'etre. After all, these parties intend to represent us in parliament, and to legislate in our collective names. The least they could do, therefore, is give us an indication of what they actually think about issues that are of concern to others. Well, hunting has always been an issue for me personally – I was (briefly) a committee member of the youth section of BirdLife when it was still called 'MOSY' (why, oh why, did they ever change the name? It was exactly how we all felt during those 5am bird-ringing sessions in bedewed Gozo valleys… 'mossy'). So it never struck me as unreasonable to expect the party I voted for to at least occasionally pretend to share my concern. And how could they not, anyway? All those cute fluffy little birds, singing happily away in full- throated ease, when… BA-BLAM! Smouldering hot lead pellets come searing into their bodies, shattering bones and severing flight muscles, and down they tumble in an untidy heap of blood and feathers. How could anyone witness that calamity, and not be moved with indignation to clamour for swift judgment to overtake the perpetrators, etc.? That, at any rate, was how I used to see things back then. I was also reading a lot of stuff like Ivanhoe: "Chivalry! Why, maiden, she is the nurse of pure and high affection…the stay of the oppressed, the redresser of grievances, the curb of the power of the tyrant…!" So perhaps my expectations of political parties were just slightly unrealistic back then. Even so, there were other, less romantic but equally valid political reasons to get involved. It always struck me as incongruous that any political party would simply disregard an issue that many people (myself included) felt strongly enough about to base their vote upon. Why should I vote for a party, anyway, if it doesn't even want to represent my views in parliament? And isn't that the whole point of an election to begin with? But that was all in the years before either party ever so much as squeaked a word about hunting, let alone fought pitched battles over it at every election. Things would change very quickly, and the turning point came in the early 1990s: when someone must have pointed out to Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami that his dream of joining the EU might hit a snag, if he didn't do something about Malta's very lax hunting regulations. It fell to a lone MP named Stanley Zammit to draw up the necessary regulations to bring us in line with the European Birds Directive… what followed were mass protests, random acts of vandalism, and the sheepish withdrawal of Zammit's proposed law: along with Zammit himself, who was reassigned and (practically) never heard of again. Then came the 1996 election, ahead of which Labour leader Alfred Sant and Foreign Minister George Vella signed a treaty with the hunters' federation to guarantee that a future Labour government 'would not legislate in a such a way as to piss off any hunter, great or small' (or words to that approximate effect). And that more or less set the tone for every election ever since. In '98 Fenech Adami signed an identical treaty… only the wording this time was: 'anything they can offer you, we can do better' (it even came with a free karaoke DVD). In fact, just about everything that happened in connection with hunting in the last 20 years – the case against Malta in the European Court, the abrupt closure of spring hunting (and ensuing mayhem) in 2008… and again in 2014… – it all goes back to that pivotal moment of realisation, at some point around 1993 or 1994, that this issue they had both ignored for so long had the power to make or break governments, and possibly even to destabilise the country. (I was present in Valletta during the 2008 protest, and trust me, it came close). And when both parties did come round to 'taking up a position' on hunting, the positions they took were never dictated by any real concern with the issue itself, or even with the immediate necessity of committing to policy direction. I used to think the primary concern was votes… and of course, it was, in the beginning. But I now I realise there was all along something deeper and darker (almost tragic, in fact) lurking beneath the surface. Let's face it: both Labour and the PN would have carried on ignoring the issue indefinitely… until it got in the way of their own carefully laid plans for this country, and forced them to pay attention. Fenech Adami needed the hunters to get into Europe; Sant needed them to get into government. Both were pressing, do-or-die issues at the time, and both Labour and PN were willing to gamble on an alliance regardless of any future price to pay. And both have paid a price. If neither party to date has been able to veer from its shared 'yes to spring hunting' policy, it is not because this policy has been particularly successful… but more because they are trapped by their own political promises, and cannot now wriggle out. They have to keep repeating the same old arguments, whether or not they ever manage to win over the votes they once hoped to attract. In the case of the PN, it is now safe to say that those votes have been irretrievably lost. Few can deny that the deal has in fact worked out far better for Labour than for the PN – but that is mainly because Labour spent all except four of the past 25 years in Opposition. Being in government – and therefore expected to deliver – the Nationalists quickly discovered that certain promises (especially the one that said 'things would not change for the hunters AT ALL') were impossible to keep. By the time Gonzi was forced to close the spring season in 2008, the hunters had not only crossed the Rubicon, but were already marching on the Palace. Nor have they forgotten that it was Simon Busuttil who had first given them all those ill-fated assurances, in the days when he was still the public face of MiC. But while Labour clearly benefited from the situation in both 1996 and 2013, the situation is less rosy now. After the 2014 spring season Raphael Vassallo Just about everything that happened in connection with hunting in the last 20 years, all goes back to that pivotal moment of realisation, at some point around 1993 or 1994, that this issue the parties had both ignored for so long had the power to make or break governments, and possibly even to destabilise the country S mall and medium sized businesses are crucial to healthy economies. They have a significant inf luence on the main economic indicators of any country. This is certainly true for the Maltese economy where SMEs and micro-enterprises create healthy investment and a number of job opportunities. According to the report published by the European Commission entitled 'Annual report on European SMEs 2013/2014', small businesses in the non-financial sector add up to 21.6 million companies in the EU and 88.8 million jobs. 99% of all businesses are SMEs and 67% of all employees are in SME companies. Hence, SMEs are of significant importance in the economic sector, providing extremely important added value. However, the same report shared a serious concern since it concluded that the economic recovery did not reach small businesses in the EU during 2013. The same report also lists Malta as one of eight countries in the EU that managed to make a full recovery since 2008 by overcoming a number of factors, including employment numbers when compared to the pre- crisis years. The majority of EU countries however, have not yet fully recovered, especially when it comes to economic growth. This is but one of the many indicators that show that Malta's economy is performing well, especially when compared to the economy of other EU countries. Continuity and stability are crucial factors that help safeguard such results. However, without a clear vision and renewed vigour we risk losing these gains. Indeed, we need to explore and find new niches that involve new investment opportunities and market sectors. The current administration has clearly instilled a new pro-business approach. The government has shown, time and again, that it is inclined in developing and strengthening its policies towards a pro-business climate. This is aimed at attracting more foreign business and investment to our island while sustaining homegrown companies. The present administration is working hard to facilitate the positive experience of new investors. Proposals and projects are being consistently followed up and there is a clear willingness that this government wants to make things happen and to reap results. Facilitation kicks in the very moment an investor shows interest in Malta. Ministers, even the Prime Minister himself, are accessible. Meetings are being set up without too much ado and efforts by Malta Enterprise have been tireless. Great effort is being made with potential investors being offered sterling service in order to optimise their experience in Malta. One of the main complaints in previous years was the level of bureaucracy that percolated through the Maltese system. This government is committed to reducing bureaucracy. In fact, specific units aimed at eliminating unnecessary processes have already been set up and government agencies are in the process of setting up one stop shops. Such measures also apply to our local SMEs, which are the bedrock of our economy as ref lected during this year's budget estimates. Among the many positive measures announced, there will be amendments in the income tax Pro-business is pro-Malta Miriam Dalli Continuity and stability are crucial factors that help safeguard economic results. However, without a clear vision and renewed vigour we risk losing gains. Indeed, we need to explore and find new niches that involve new investment opportunities and market sectors