No, we won't shut up

Apart from my letter, a longer version of which I published in this blog under the heading "What's next, Nazis in the classroom?", today's The Times publishes a letter from a very bright guy called Daniel Xriha, under the heading "Just shut up"

Mr Xriha writes: "Joseph Mangion, the president of BirdLife (Malta), should stop his irritable whines that the government is violating some EU legislation simply because it still intends to allow the socio-cultural Maltese tradition of hunting in spring".

I don't know about you, but I actually I find the hunters' persistence in insisting that spring hunting does not breach EU legislation, to be nothing but whines coming from people whom their gut feeling tells them that it is only a matter of time until their "socio-cultural Maltese tradition" of murdering birds in spring will be brought to a close. But of course, a drowning man will clutch at straws. Or do these people honestly believe that spring hunting is to be retained, despite the EU's several warnings and proclamations to the effect that it will not be permitted? I don't know about that, but I sure know that ignorance as opposed to delusion would at least conserve some sense of dignity for them. After all, maybe it's not their fault that they are being deceived by the two major political parties in Malta that spring hunting has any chance of being retained.

I would like to remind Mr Xriha that the European Commission, on the 17th October 2007, issued a final warning to the Maltese government to ban spring hunting or be hauled before the European Court of Justice.

As EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas has made clear on countless occasions, "Derogations are only given if the conditions providing for them are met. The main condition is that spring hunting becomes possible if no sufficient alternatives exist. Although the Maltese authorities invoke this as the reason for allowing spring hunting, we have found that there are sufficient alternatives in autumn and, so, we have not granted any derogation. This also means that Malta must come in line with EU rules and stop hunting in spring".

Mr Xriha goes on to say that "Prior to Malta's EU accession, Mr Mangion was one of the 'chosen few prominent' Maltese citizens who, on this very daily (The Times), huge photograph and all, proclaimed that he would be voting yes for Malta to join the EU in the then forthcoming referendum.

Now all those wise 'chosen few prominent' Maltese must have been very well versed in what had been negotiated and agreed between the Maltese government and the EU, and if not all, for one, Mr Mangion was definitely aware that Malta had made and documented its crystal clear intentions to the EU, that it will still allow hunting in spring as an EU member state".

Now here is where Mr Xriha's confusion stems from. The simple fact that the Maltese government had made it clear that it intended to allow spring hunting does not necessarily mean that the EU would concede to the Maltese government's request and give Maltese hunters a derogation. It's this simple, Mr Xriha. This is how EU derogations work. A particular government applies for a derogation, and the EU either accepts or rejects the application for a derogation. The EU commission has already made it clear that a derogation will not be given to Maltese hunters. You don't need a university degree to understand something so simple and straight-forward as this. Let me spell it out once again: You ask for permission to do something. Permission is not given. You cannot do what you asked for. Elementary, Mr Xriha.

Mr Xriha concludes his letter by saying: "It is, therefore, high time for Mr Mangion and the rest of the Maltese population who voted for EU membership to shut up and accept all conditions, including spring hunting, that have come about as part and parcel of Malta's EU membership agreements.

Unless of course, this half of the Maltese population have now understood that maybe either the government or the EU, or both, have deceived them".

It sure looks like Mr Xriha understands everything in reverse. Let me correct his wrong conclusion on this ongoing pitiful state of affairs: It is high time for Mr Xriha and his ilk to recognize that now that we are EU members (and those who voted "yes" for membership voted so precisely for this reason) we should accept all conditions, including the abolition of spring hunting, that have come about as part and parcel of Malta's EU membership agreements. Since a derogation on spring hunting was never given (and I challenge Mr Xriha or anyone else to prove otherwise - with documented evidence), membership in the EU means an automatic ban on spring hunting.

Of course, it is high time for the hunting minority to recognize that, on this particular issue, the government has deceived them. Get over it. They should count their lucky stars that speciesist EU regulations do allow for the murder of some birds in other seasons. That the abolition of hunting in spring in Malta will mean that hunters will have fewer opportunity to murder birds, is a cause for celebration, albeit a limited one. Hopefully, it will be a matter of time until all hunting in Malta will be seen as just a shameful page in Maltese history, as opposed to being ridiculously spoken of by a dying minority as a "socio-cultural tradition". There is nothing socio-cultural about murder.

And no, Mr Xriha, I won't shut up until all speciesist practices, including the murder of birds by hunters, are abolished.