Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/494410
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 12 APRIL 2015 Opinion 19 Oh Yes, it's a no, Oh No, it's a yes Saviour Balzan Y esterday I was shocked to finally realise that after so many years the presence of street leaders posing as bullies at polling booths is still a natural feature of our electoral landscape. Yesterday across Malta and Gozo the true face of the hunters finally re- surfaced – in the shape of pickets next to polling booths. This time they weren't clones of law yer Kathleen Grima in an elegant outfit and becoming jewellery, instead we were faced with the usual bunch of aggressive looking men. Just plain looking bullies! There were no sweet talking representatives of the IVA movement but resurrected living statuettes reminding me so much of Andrew Diacono's figures of Maltese characters. At the polling booth the bullies waved ballot papers at elderly people and asked them to vote yes. On the way to the polling booth IVA posters were displayed and no attempt was made to remove them. There was of course a lot at stake for the IVA campaign. As voting day progressed I have to say that I was impressed with the turnout. Considering that only half of the local councils were being contested it was quite significant that people turned up considerably to vote in a referendum that was to determine whether we retain spring hunting or not. Those voters who wished to keep spring hunting had every reason to get worked up and go out to vote. They had a motive. A personal one, but not at all altruistic. To defend the right to kill for fun, some people go through incredible mental gymnastics to justif y their actions. Hunting has always been an emotional issue. On the other side of the border, those who oppose hunting are guided by a very simple principle. They see hunters as bullies, they think hunters are killers and can never be guardians of nature. They think that birds should NOT be killed for pleasure. The very fact that the political parties did not officially bless any of the campaigns left the mobilisation of the No vote to the efforts of SHout, Spring Hunting out. Armed with very little to go by, SHout has done miracles. Identif ying the messages and the messengers was not easy. The same applied to the strategy. So it started with a negative campaign, and ended with a positive campaign. The final message relayed was that it was all about our right to enjoy life and the countryside, to enjoy nature and its wonders. I do not think that we were magnificent but we surely had a better campaign than the hunters, who even resorted to misinformation about themselves. IVA mimicked the 2013 Labour part y campaign to the extent that it was clearly either a great coincidence or else the person involved in the thinking process was a disciple of the Labour camp. Indeed one of the people always hovering around was a former official of the universit y-based Labour group PULSE. And many Labour politicians, namely Clint Camilleri, Joseph Sammut, Michael Falzon, Deborah Schembri, Alfred Griscti and Roderick Galdes did not shy away from supporting the hunters in a very visible and public way. It was a pit y, but then there was also no hard evidence that Labour, as a part y, supported the hunters. On the other hand, the Nationalist part y was very keen to support the SHout movement but could not for fear of losing votes, and SHout would have nothing to do with such a thing. Thankfully both leaders shared the same opinion. If they had both stated they would vote No, the referendum would have been a non event. In the end they both said they would vote Yes. The fact that they shared the same voting intention, depoliticised the campaign. Only once did Muscat try and accuse Busuttil of campaigning with No. A complete invention, if ever there was one. In the very end, SHout was really a movement on its very own. A real movement unlike what we usually face or understand when we hear about political movements. With Moira Delia (a Labourite), Mark Sultana (surely not a Labourite) and myself (surely not a Nationalist) we epitomised the face of SHout. Mark Sultana, a long time leading member of BirdLife Malta offered the sane, calm voice in the campaign, I and Moira provided the chorus. Many others helped, others donated money and behind closed doors a platoon of diehards carried out the painstaking and thankless work. There were also the organisations, but the real backbone of the campaign was BirdLife Malta, half a century old and realisably the biggest and better organised environmental NGO on the island. There was other support. I should not forget the MaltaToday offices (and its staff ) which were turned into a nerve centre for the campaign and rose to the occasion, yet another time. This was in fact the third referendum campaign partially organised at MaltaToday, after Europe and Divorce. This morning the result will be made known. I would very much like it to go our way. But if it does go the other way, I know we would have all tried our best and what we have done we have done for the best. There was no logical reason for any of us to have got involved in such a stressful campaign, other than giving a small gift to our little Island and the birds and countryside. Nothing will be the same after this referendum. Whether the result is a no or a yes. The people I fear that will have to take stock are the politicians. The ones that do not have the gall to take environmental issues and embrace them. Nothing will be the same after this. People power has reached new heights. Referenda may after all be the modus operandi for the future. @saviourbalzan There were also the organisations, but the real backbone of the campaign was BirdLife Malta, realisably the biggest and better organised environmental NGO on the island PHOTOGRAPHY BY CHRIS MANGION