There is a worrying trend appearing in the way certain western governments are challenging the rules. Two examples figure in the news at the moment: Donald Trump’s refusal to concede defeat in the presidential elections in the USA and Boris Johnson’s determination to keep parts of a bill which would contravene the Withdrawal Act from the European Union.

President Trump – he retains the title even as a former president – appears to be grasping at straws by insisting there have been irregularities in the voting in certain key states. He is refusing any assistance to Joe Biden in preparing the transition. His behaviour mimics that of a child whose toys have just been taken away. Even some in the Republican Party who have long felt that his leadership was damaging to the country but felt unable to criticise their president while he was still in office are beginning to come out and accept that they have lost the election.

Some of us remember Watergate, and the illegal attempts by Richard Nixon to undermine the election for his second term of office. I am not sure quite how to compare the two statesmen, but both of them seem to fall short of the integrity one somehow expects from a national leader of a free democracy.

Boris Johnson has suffered a defeat in the House of Lords over his new Internal Market bill which contains clauses which conflict with the Withdrawal Act. I am afraid this is another example of a leader suffering from ego problems. Downing Street has announced that the disputed clauses will be reinstated when the bill returns to the House of Commons. Formally, the House of Lords does not have the power to block new legislation, only delay it. By sending a bill back to the Commons rather than forwarding it for Royal Assent, the Lords effectively draw out the process – and forces the Commons to vote again on the bill.

If the Commons approve the bill for a second time, it goes back to the Lords. They can then reject the bill twice more within the lifetime of a parliament, after which it automatically goes for Royal Assent. The government could invoke the Parliament Act after the second refusal by the Lords – a somewhat dramatic move – begging the question as to whether the government is really listening to the objections of the upper chamber or not.

To me, that is the critical point: listening to the prevailing opinions and acting accordingly. In the USA, the last of the votes are still being counted; 4 states have yet to declare their results. Nonetheless, the overwhelming opinion there is that Donald Trump has lost, albeit by a small number of votes. Statements on broadcast media by Trump supporters alleging voting fraud but with no facts to substantiate it are being interrupted or faded out by the broadcasters. I cannot remember that ever happening before.

Boris Johnson is determined to get his new bill through because of the middle finger gesture it makes to the European Union: we decide about our trade and industry now, not you! Concerns that invoking the disputed clauses in the bill would effectively move the trade border from the Irish Sea to the mainland of Ireland and thus risk political unrest again are being ignored, as is the condemnation of reneging on an international treaty.

Brinkmanship is not new in politics. I am just a little disturbed about the way Trump and Johnson are playing that game at the moment.

So-called traditions come and go very quickly these days. Yesterday in church, a kind of hot-cross bun was distributed, marking an event in the life of St Hubertus. It is a local tradition in my neck of the woods, but goes back hundreds of years.

We have just had Halloween. This tradition was unheard of a few decades ago here and originated largely in America. St Maarten was another of those regional traditions that is now being picked up by the rest of the country.

Fireworks is one of those traditions that has interesting roots. Some countries have traditional firework days, usually to celebrate their national day. Many have long used New Year’s Eve as the firework night, with televised pictures of firework displays going round the globe as each time zone reaches midnight. It is supposed to be the noise that drives evil spirits away at the start of the New Year.

The UK has a firework night on 5^th November which commemorates the failed attempt to blow up king and parliament over 400 years ago. These days the UK also uses fireworks to see in the New Year in common with so many other lands.

The problem this year is of course corona. People gather in close proximity to each other to watch fireworks in the street, and the emergency services have their hands full dealing with firework accidents and fires. All of this is good enough reason to consider how things should be done differently this year.

The trend in the Netherlands in recent years has been to move from individually bought fireworks to locally organised displays. This helps the safety aspect, but this year does not solve the problem of groups gathering together.

There is only one logical step and that is to ban fireworks altogether this year. There are so many problems attached to such a decision however that it is difficult to see how it could be successfully implemented and policed.

Where I live, within minutes I can cross the border in Belgium and buy fireworks that are banned in the Netherlands. The same is true in the east of the country with the border to Germany. A ban on fireworks would really only work if neighbouring countries did the same.

The sale of fireworks here is restricted to the last few days of December; in Belgium you can buy fireworks the whole year round. Those determined to set off fireworks at the end of the year will find ways of obtaining them, including fireworks which are illegal (and extra dangerous) or which exceed the size and noise levels allowed here in retail sales.

It will not be Mr Average that buys in fireworks if they are banned, generally speaking, but the sort of people that enjoy flouting the rules and, for example, have organised or attended illegal parties during corona restrictions. The kind of person that welcomes any opportunity to stick it to the nasty government. The kind of person that doesn’t hesitate from lobbing fireworks at police and emergency staff attending fires or other incidents. The kind of person that will happily reserve one of their biggest firework ‘bombs’ for public buildings.

I enjoyed fireworks during the innocence of my childhood. Recent studies have shown that birds have a terrible time on firework night. As a former dog owner, I have experienced first-hand the problems of walking my dog in the run-up to firework night, and his anxiety on the night itself with so many explosions taking place close by.

Fireworks are pretty to watch, but come at a cost. I have long favoured a ban on retail sales, with the compensation that public displays would become the norm. So much for my own point of view.

Now we have corona to contend with. The Dutch Prime Minister has frequently used the expression ‘devilish dilemma’, and I think the problem of fireworks this year certainly falls into that category. The biggest problem is not the fuses on the fireworks but people with short fuses! I do not envy the government’s task of solving this impending problem for this year, and I await their expected announcement on it at the end of the week with great anticipation.

I am not certain but I think the Netherlands is probably the only democratic country to have a political party dedicated to the rights of animals. Their name (Partij voor de Dieren) sounds to my mind even more ridiculous in English: Party for the Animals. They have at present 5 out of the 150  seats in parliament, 3 out of 75 in the Senate, and 1 out of the 26 seats in the European Parliament.

The party swung into action with a vengeance this week when two of their constituents were murdered in broad daylight!

The crime scene was a zoo. Two chimpanzees had escaped from their enclosure and were roaming around in the area where members of the public were walking around. One of the chimps was 19 years old, but the other was a veteran 53, and had already spent the last 50 years in that particular zoo.

They posed a danger to visitors to the zoo, although they usually only display aggressive behaviour towards others they know well: members of their group but also their keepers. The decision was taken to shoot them down because a tranquiliser would have taken too long to take effect. Such animals can be incredibly mobile and decisions on how to deal with the potential danger needed to be taken quickly. Based on what I have read and heard, shooting them was probably the wisest option.

Of course there will be an inquiry into how and why these chimpanzees were able to escape. Chimps are very intelligent and it can be a daily battle of wits between the keepers and them.

What interests me more is the reaction from the Party for the Animals. They immediately tabled questions in Parliament about this incident. They have renewed their demands for the closure of all zoos, starting with this particular zoo. Amongst other arguments, they stated that the fact that these animals escaped shows that they did not enjoy living in an enclosure.

It does seem sad when several seats in the different political forums are taken up by a party that focuses on animal rights. I do not understand why a cross-party lobby is not employed to deal with this. It would make for a more credible campaign. In Brussels, there is the possibility to set up Working Parties for specific themes which cross national and party lines.

Of course we should take the needs of animals, and the environment in general, into account when taking decisions which have an impact on the natural world around us. I really think that a political party shows a misplaced respect for the Parliamentary machine which already has its hands full representing the needs and rights of all of us.

Zoos in general are not bad thing. There are far-reaching regulations in place these days to ensure the animals are housed appropriately, and a lot of work is done behind the scenes on breeding programmes to support natural communities in the wild. As a child I was taken to the zoo and that was a vital building block in my awareness of the natural world. Seeing elephants and giraffes first hand is far more effective than pictures in an encyclopaedia or, as is possible these days, films on tv and internet.

In a democracy, I am happy that my opinion can be heard alongside those totally opposed to my point of view. We should not be wasting franchise space on political parties formed to champion such issues.

Postscript

Within days of the shooting of the escaped chimpanzees, animal lovers were calling for some kind of memorial plaque to be placed in the zoo where it happened.

The news now is that the zoo is indeed going to do just that!

If we are seriously going to go down that road, we are going to end up surrounded by plaques commemorating the demise of all sorts of animals – often pets, I guess – that met their end in public places.

Whilst we should discharge our duty of care of the animal world, and the natural world in general, to the best of our ability, let us not forget the needs of mankind. There are wars, and millions suffering hunger. When it is our turn to face our Maker, will He be more impressed that we opened our wallets for memorial plaques for animals or that we did what we could to help our fellow man?