A dishonourable speech in Parliament ... is this Labour's voice on Hunting?

Labour MP Joe Abela has asked a judge to abstain from a court case against a hunter, saying comments which he had made could prejudice the case.
Speaking during the adjournment of the House of Representatives late yesterday, Mr Abela also made a strong attack against the government's treatment of hunters and criticised Birdlife Malta for using public funds for literature against the hunters.
Mr Abela said he was not a hunter himself and had ‘great sympathy' for birds', but the House needed to hear both the points of view of environmentalists and hunters.
He said he was concerned recently to have received a pamphlet, published by Birdlife Malta and funded by the EU, asking whether it was right that hunters had taken over the countryside, to the detriment of ordinary citizens. While it was not true that the hunters had taken over the countryside, or 80 percent of it as was claimed, was it right that EU funds, which were public funds, were used in this way to incite the people against the hunters? Was this healthy for society?
It was well known, Mr Abela said, that many hunters owned the fields where they went hunting. Did Birdlife expect private property to be open for all?
It was not fair, he said, that the rights of hunters continued to be trampled upon. And not just by Birdlife.
The current state of affairs was such that it was almost better to have a field of haxixa than to have a field where one could go hunting. It was unacceptable in this country that one could buy haxixa everywhere and at any time, but then the special forces were deployed to persecute hunters, stopping them as they walked in the countryside without any suspicion of wrongdoing. This was a violation of people's rights.
Nobody was stopping the people, including tourists, from taking their walks along countryside paths, but one could not expect to have a right to trespass over people's property, Mr Abela said.
He said another example of how rights were trampled was the case of Karl Bugeja, who is facing charges in court of shooting a protected bird. Even before witnesses were heard and the case was concluded, the judge had told him to either settle or he would suffer even more punishment, Mr Abela said.
This, he insisted, prejudiced the case. How could he not lose the case? Was it possible that the judiciary too was bowing its head to what the government, and ultimately Brussels, wanted? How could the rights of 16,000 hunters be ignored?
Malta was being purer than the virgins in the interpretation of EU law, and it had become the only country where hunters practically could not practice anywhere.
It was important that the courts enjoyed the people's respect, and he was therefore requesting Mr Justice Galea Debono to abstain from this case, once it had been prejudiced, Mr Abela said. Mr Bugeja, like any other citizen, expected the courts to be independent of what the government, Brussels, Birdlife or anybody else said. If the concept of independence was eroded, how could institutions such as the courts enjoy credibility?
Mr Abela said he was therefore appealing for independence by the courts and proper use of public funds, including EU funds.

I was disgusted – to say the least – to read about a very dis-honourable speech made in Parliament. An ode to hunters, from none other than Labour MP Joe Abela, who found it expedient to express himself in a way that interferes with the work of the judiciary in what appears to be an on-going case against a particular hunter. In the process, he also denigrates and brutally attacks 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 takes 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 claims that he is not a hunter himself - but he certainly is no friend or ‘sympathiser’ of birds – whatever that means – 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 attacks Birdlife’s EU-sponsored pamphlet and questions the reason behind such a sponsorship. Little does this honourable gentleman realize what the European Union really stands for. If one had to take a look at the EUbarometer, one would find that from among the so many directives that the EU gives, as well as the stands that it takes on countless issues, one of the most important aspects that the majority of EU citizens really appreciate is the effect that the EU directives have in controlling the environment – and by that, we also mean the natural environment.
And birds, this honourable gentleman must be taught to realize, are an intrinsic part of the environment, along with all other animals that are not there to entertain the human species, even less so to be a natural target for some of us who have no life, literally, and have nothing better to do in their spare (and non-spare) time than to 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 – how, I simply cannot fathom; perhaps one can tell us how these hunters acquired this land in the first place, when they acquired it, how much they paid or are paying for it, to whom, etc …! – means that you also own the birds that fly in the air above it?
Does it also mean that you have lead and pellets coming down over private property and community land such as roads, streets and lanes? Have we monitored in a scientific way the effect that such lead is having on our soil, and its effect on the quality of water on our water-table?
What are the ‘rights of hunters’ that this honourable gentleman is referring to? And if hunters have rights, don’t we, the rest of the people living on these islands, have our rights too? Abela denies the fact that people, including tourists, are stopped in their tracks, in the countryside. Perhaps Abela too, along with other MPs in the House, are living on cloud nine!
Who are the ‘environmentalists’ that Abela chooses to denigrate? Are they merely the administrators of environmental NGOs? If this is what he thinks, how wrong Abela is!
He claims that a certain judge should abstain from continuing to hear a case against a hunter. But, with his words, isn’t he, himself, showing prejudice in favour of this hunter? Who shall we believe? And with what moral and academic authority does this honourable gentleman come along, standing up in the House and pontificate about a subject which he should have been prudent enough to avoid? Or does being an MP mean that you have a God-given power and authority to speak about anything under the sun, even if you are the world’s least-paid clown?
He speaks about ‘the people’ and ‘their respect’ with regards to the judiciary. He would do well to leave the judiciary well alone – that is what the more intelligent people in this country want. Certainly, Abela does not speak on my behalf when he attacks this judge and asks him to abstain.
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 Abela’s speech or whether, indeed, this is the way things will go 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.




BirdLife denies Labour MP's claims
BirdLife Malta has insisted that its publication "A spring guide to reclaiming your countryside" is not funded by the European Union but by its own members.
The society was reacting to comments in Parliament by Labour MP Joe Abela.
Tolga Temuge, Executive Director BirdLife Malta, said that it seemed that Mr Abela had not understood the content of this information booklet.
"According to MEPA only 22% of Maltese terrain consists of natural vegetation. And 80% of that limited countryside is open to hunting, leaving almost no room for the majority of people in this country to enjoy their countryside in peace," he said.
On Mr Abela's comments on the rights of hunters being trampled upon, Birdlife said Malta is the only country in the EU that still allows spring hunting, has the longest hunting period in Europe, has the highest density of hunters per square kilometre and has only a mere 22 police ALE officers to check illegal hunting.
"Mr. Abela is more than welcome to join BirdLife Malta volunteers during the peak migration period to witness firsthand the illegal killing of protected species and the occupation of our countryside," Temuge said.
BirdLife called on the Malta Labour Party to state whether Mr Abela's position reflected the official party line on the issue of hunting.