For once, Joseph Muscat and Simon Busuttil are on the same page.
They have both declared that they will be voting to retain the spring hunting derogation when the referendum is held in April.
It is not the intention of this article to argue whether one should vote yes or no. The PM and Opposition Leader, like everyone else, have the right to choose either way, or not vote at all.
But I do have reservations on how they announced this decision and the reasons behind it.
The first thing that comes to mind is that they also said that the referendum should not be turned into a political football. So why did they announce their intentions in the first place? Both should have kept their opinion to themselves rather than try to influence others. They both know that there is a sizeable portion of the electorate who will follow the leader in whatever circumstances, and so by speaking their mind Muscat and Busuttil have secured a good number of votes in favour of the hunters.
Joseph Muscat made his opinion known on the same day that he called the referendum. Again, and this is a side issue, he should have allowed the President to make the call, as is laid down in the law. But we're used to cutting corners under Labour.
He said he will be voting yes before the matter was discussed within his parliamentary group. It is no wonder that he has been described as a dictator by people who have worked with him.
His decision to vote in favour of spring hunting has put his fellow MPs and party officials in a quandary. Only those who, like Marlene Farrugia, have the guts to stand up to their leader will now dare to speak against spring hunting. Even people like Toni Abela, a self-declared environmentalist who is against hunting could not bring himself to go against Joseph Muscat.
Simon Busuttil waited until the party had discussed the issue in its internal structures before coming out to say he will be voting in favour of spring hunting. At least, he did show some respect towards his colleagues. But his saying that he will vote yes to be consistent with the position he took when Malta was negotiating its membership with the European Union does not hold water. Then, he was arguing on behalf of the country; today it is a personal issue that he has to deal with.
As in the case of Labour, even here, Busuttil's decision to say what he will do has put pressure on those who are in contrast with him on the issue. He has effectively shut them all up, as not one of them will want to be seen as going against the leader.
In the end, it all boils down to votes, and my reading of it is that both Muscat and Busuttil know that in the long run they cannot antagonise the hunting population.
The hunting extremists - those who choose a political party depending on how their sport is treated - are much bigger in number than the environmental extremists. And the calculation Muscat and Busuttil have made is that, if the referendum does lead to the elimination of spring hunting, they can both turn to the hunters and say "it's not my fault, I was on your side".
For once, Joseph Muscat and Simon Busuttil are on the same page.
The page of political hypocrisy.