An ode to hunters from none other than Labour MP Joe Abela. He also denigrated and brutally attacked one of the most important environmental NGOs in the country as well as being of scandal with regard to the content of his “speech”. With his words, he also took the government to task for its tough stance in its handling of the hunting issue – as if we’re not bad enough as it is!
He claimed that he is not a hunter himself. But he certainly is no friend or “sympathiser” of birds, because he sees nothing wrong with these birds being shot down at will, maimed or somehow hurt and left to die in the countryside by Maltese hunters.
He attacked Birdlife’s EU-sponsored pamphlet and questioned the reason behind such a sponsorship. Little does this honourable gentleman realise what the European Union really stands for. If one had to take a look at the Eurobarometer, one would find that from among the many EU policies, as well as the stands it takes on countless issues, one of the most important aspects which the majority of EU citizens really appreciate is the effect EU directives have in controlling environmental issues – here, also meaning the natural environment.
This honourable gentleman must be made to realise that birds are an intrinsic part of the environment, along with all other animals, which are not there to entertain humans, even less so to be a natural target for some who have no life, literally, and have nothing better to do in their spare (and non-spare) time than shoot at birds which after all are not their property but belong to us all.
Or does this honourable gentleman feel that owning a piece of land means that you also own the birds that fly in the air above it?
Also, should we not consider (in a scientific manner) the effects lead and pellets have on our soil and the water table?
Furthermore, what are the “rights of hunters” that this honourable gentleman is referring to? If hunters have rights, don’t we, the rest of the people living on these islands, have our rights too? Mr Abela denies the fact that people, including tourists, are stopped in their tracks, in the countryside. Perhaps Mr Abela too, along with other MPs in the House of Representatives, are living on cloud nine!
Who are the “environmentalists” that Mr Abela chooses to denigrate? Are they merely the administrators of environmental NGOs? A very wrong assumption indeed.
And with what moral and academic authority does this honourable gentleman come along, standing up in parliament and pontificate about a subject which he should have been prudent enough to avoid? Or does being an MP mean that you have the God-given power and authority to speak about anything under the sun?
He speaks about “the people” and “their respect” with regards to the judiciary. He would do well to leave the judiciary alone – that is what the more intelligent people in this country want.
My conclusion: is this speech a reflection of Labour’s approach to the subject of hunting? We, the electorate, demand to hear Labour leaders telling us whether they distance themselves from Mr Abela’s speech or whether, indeed, this is the way things will be done if and when Labour wins the next general election. While waiting for such a declaration, the voters who are in favour of having a clean natural environment in our small country, will arrive at their conclusions and know who to vote for and who not to vote for.
Pieta`