Children exposed to bullfight violence

Many foreign holidaymakers are unwittingly mistreating their children and breaking the law by bringing under-age youngsters to bullfights, according to animal rights activists in the Algarve.

The activist group Cidade de Albufeira Anti Touradas (CAAT) is urging the government inspectorate in charge of safety at public shows to stop turning a blind eye to the illegal admittance of children under the age of 12.

The protesters claim that many youngsters are being blatantly exposed to animal cruelty every time a bullfight is staged in the Algarve.

Tourists make up the big majority of spectators in the Albufeira bullring, the busiest venue of its kind in the country.

Portugal’s commission for the protection of children and young people at risk (CNPCJR) confirms that the law clearly forbids entrance to under 12-year-olds.

There are no exceptions to this stipulation. When the authorities are unsure of a child’s age, parents are supposed to be asked to show proof in the form of an identity document. If parents are unable to do so, the responsibility for adhering to the law lies with them.

       The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child earlier this year expressed concern and called on Portugal to investigate the mental and emotional effects of exposing child spectators to bullfighting.

Anti-bullfight protesters stop short of blaming holidaymakers for knowingly mistreating their children or breaking the law. Most British and other foreign parents, they say, are unaware of the law and are themselves victims of misinformation about bullfighting being an acceptable feature of Portuguese culture.

“Everyone is told that the bulls are not killed in the ring as in Spain, so it sounds as if Portuguese bullfighting is innocent,” says Isabel Searle, leader of the protesters. “But the tourists are not told about the suffering before, during and after the fights.”

This form of public entertainment has been going on in Portugal as well as Spain for centuries, but growing numbers of people in both countries are demanding that it be finally banned.

Children along with adults visiting a tourada in Albufeira can expect to witness four to six bulls being taunted and speared in a spectacle that lasts for about two hours.

Bullfights are held weekly during the summer months. “Tourist go out of curiosity. They are not aware of the cruelty involved,” said Mark Evans, a member of the activist group. “I’ve seen many holidaymakers looking shocked and sometimes physically sick after their first bullfight. They don’t go again.”

CAAT protesters of various nationalities are planning another peaceful demonstration outside the Albufeira arena next Wednesday evening (July 16^th) and again on the evening of Friday 22^nd August. They are appealing for others, foreign residents as well as Portuguese, to join them.

When questioned about young children being allowed into the bullring, police have told protesters it is a matter for the Inspeção-Geral das Atividades Culturais (IGAC). The inspectorate has so far shown no interest in rigorously applying the law, say the activists.

By promoting awareness among tourists about the brutality involved, protesters hope to bring about an end to bullfighting in the Algarve, which might eventually lead to a ban throughout the country.  

One of the few British aficionados living in the Algarve, who has been going to bullfights in Spain for decades, told us that the standard of bullfighting in the Algarve is low because they are merely tourist shows.

He agreed that bullfighting is a violent spectacle and noted that even at its highest level it is a dangerous one for the men fighting on foot, who are often injured, sometimes fatally when hit by a charging bull weighing perhaps 500 kilos. Horses, which feature strongly in Portuguese-style bullfighting, are also at risk.

Compared with domesticated cattle raised for meat, bulls destined for the ring have a much better lifestyle, he claimed. Quality fighting bulls are kept in good pastures for five years before entering the ring in top physical condition, whereas cattle are often dosed with drugs to hasten growth and kept in miserable surroundings before being slaughtered at less than two years old.

He disputed that support for bullfighting was decreasing, saying that the banning of bullfighting in Catalonia was politically motivated, while its popularity in Andalusia and parts of Portugal was still very strong. In France it is on the increase, he said.

Vasco Reis, a retired Portuguese veterinary surgeon who has studied bullfighting and whose persistence helped abolish it from the Algarve municipality of Aljezur, argues that anatomic, physiologic and neurological reactions of bulls, horses and humans are similar when they are threatened, frightened or hurt.

“Common sense tells us this and science confirms it,” he says.

“It is important to mention the claustrophobia and the panic that the bull experiences when it is taken violently from its field and transported in a confined space. It is then constantly abused with the intention of weakening it physically and emotionally before it is led out into the ring.

“Once in the ring, the bull is subjected to much provocation and torture. Afterwards comes more suffering with the always violent and painful extraction of the spears, tearing and striking the skin to free the banderillas.

“When it is all over, the animal is transported away, worn out, hurt and febrile, in a severe toxic metabolic acidosis, which makes it very sick, until death in a slaughterhouse a few days later finally frees it from its suffering.”

The vet maintains that horses in a bullring suffer from exhaustion and terrible psychological tension because they are dominated and encouraged by force to confront the bull when the horse’s natural instinct is to run away from it.

“With the heavy training, the spurs which hurt and wound it, the bits in the mouth and the chain around the jaw, which is a painful way to overpower it, the horse risks death in the ring either by heart attack or because of the wounds inflicted on it.”

Vasco Reis concludes: “It is difficult, if not impossible to believe that bullfighters and those who enjoy bullfighting can say they love bulls and horses, when they subject them to such violence.

 “I can’t help but wonder why such a violent activity, based on the public suffering of these animals, is allowed to continue authorised by law, or even how it has fans and is applauded and glorified by some. A true democracy does not permit torture.”

                            Photo taken in Albufeira June 2014

Glasses raised for a friend of Portugal

The most relevant snippet of information to emerge from all the recent histrionics in Brussels was confirmation that Jean-Claude Juncker is a good friend of Portugal. In this country anyway, it well surpasses revelations about his drinking habits.

On a visit to Portugal in May, Juncker let it be know that he had “great respect” for the Portuguese people and that “Lisbon is the city I love most in the world.” 

Affirmation of this goodwill came from none other than the former Portuguese prime minister and out-going president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, following Juncker’s nomination last week as Barroso’s successor.

Barroso said he was “delighted” with the choice of the overwhelming majority of European Council members. He told Portuguese reporters: “For over 25 years I’ve known Jean-Claude Juncker as very pro-European, a political leader with extensive experience…. and a friend of our country”

The European Parliament is expected to approve Juncker’s appointment at an extraordinary summit in Strasbourg on July 16. Subject to the parliament’s rubber stamp, the former prime minister of Luxembourg (one of the EU’s six founder member states) will assume office when Barroso’s mandate expires at the end of October.  

When Barroso became president in 2004 he was a compromise choice. During his two five-year terms he has been widely perceived as a weak and uninspired leader. Critics have depicted him as “a visionless lap dog” pandering to the EU’s most powerful member states.

That is perhaps far too harsh a judgement considering he has had to juggle with the complexities of the often out-of-step European Commission, European Council and European Parliament during a tumultuous decade. The number of member states had just leapt from 15 to 27 and Euroscepticism was on the rise during his first term; the euro crisis dominated the second.

The extraordinary outpouring of protest votes during this year’s parliamentary elections was a clear indication of the deep and widespread disenchantment with the EU that was well beyond Barroso’s ability to control.

The centre-right European People’s Party, the centre-left Socialists and the Liberals have since negotiated and reached a deal for a pro-European majority in the parliament. The deal supports the appointment of key personnel, including that of Juncker from the centre-right as President of the European Commission and the re-election of Martin Schulz from the centre-left as President of the European Parliament.

Juncker faces a lot more opposition than that of British Prime Minister David Cameron who has stuck to his guns about Juncker being “the wrong person” for the presidency and declared his determination to “fight on” for major reform in the EU.  

As a federalist, Juncker wants closer integration within Europe while radical left-wingers in Portugal want out of the euro currency and the far right in several member states want their countries out the union altogether.

Fortunately for Juncker, his opponents in the new parliament are a fractious lot. Britain’s Ukip have formed a eurosceptic alliance with Italy’s Five Star movement, but France’s Marine Le Pen and the Netherlands’ Geert Wilders have so far failed to come up with a united front. 

The best the media could throw at Juncker just before the presidential vote in Brussels were reports that he is a heavy drinker with a penchant for cognac at breakfast. 

There was no mention that in the run-up to the 2010 general election in the UK, David Cameron told workers at Fuller’s brewery in London, “I tend to drink bitter rather than lager.” Before that he had told BBC Radio 4 listeners that his choice of a desert island luxury would be a Jura single malt Scotch whisky. 

Scotch whisky was Margaret Thatcher’s regular evening tipple. Bell’s blended was her preferred brand. She once told a personal assistant, “You must have whisky to give you energy.”

President George W. Bush apparently agreed. A heavy drinker before taking office in 2001, Jim Beam bourbon was his favourite.

Barack Obama apparently has a liking for Miller Lite Draft beer, but when photographed during a visit to Ireland he naturally had a pint of Guinness in hand.

In tune with her compatriots, Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel is sometimes seen enjoying a glass of beer. Russia’s Vladimir Putin, however, does not share his nation’s passion for vodka. It was only during visits to Germany that he developed a taste for beer, reportedly the only alcohol he touches.

Shortly before becoming France’s president, François Hollande told the Revue de Vin de France magazine: “Like many French, I am seduced by the excellence of the wines of our country.”

Perhaps Barroso’s lack-lustre performance in Europe’s top job can be attributed to his choice of drinks. Should he have gone for more whisky and less port, or settled for iced tea instead of vinho tinto?

Boozing at breakfast time is certainly questionable in anyone’s language. Maybe Barroso could persuade his successor to swap cognac in the mornings for one of Portugal’s finest aguardentes as a nightcap - and promote Portuguese exports in the process. Now that would be friendly, wouldn’t it?

Online gambling: too much at stake?

     The odds are heavy that Portugal will soon legalise online gambling. You can bet your boots gamblers will be delighted, but the chances are that many non-gamblers will be troubled by this development.

Last week the Council of Ministers approved plans to push ahead and legalise licensed online casino, poker and sports betting. Pending approval by the National Assembly and the European Commission, the new scheme could be in place by the end of this year. It will allow foreign operators to apply for licences.

Although yet to be convinced about the details, Jorge Armindo, president of the Portuguese Casino Association, said in effect that it was high time online gambling in Portugal was brought in from the cold.

It could also be said that Portugal is merely joining the big boys’ club. Online betting is already well established and rapidly expanding in Europe and elsewhere around the world. Nearly seven million people in Europe regularly gamble online.

The European Commission sums up the rather complicated legal situation as follows: “Online gambling in the EU is characterised by a diversity of regulatory frameworks. Some Member States have monopolistic regimes run either by a public or a private operator on the basis of an exclusive right.

“Others have established licensing systems for more than one operator. At the same time, operators licensed in one or more Member States offer gambling services in other Member States without the authorisation required in those countries.”

Gambling on the internet has been commonplace for years in the United States despite demands for a permanent federal ban. As online gambling is not fully regulated there, most sites that accept American gamblers are based overseas.  

While there is no clear legislation in some countries and full legalisation or a total ban in others, it is nearly impossible to prohibit or prevent access to internet gambling sites. 

All forms of gambling in Portugal at present are regulated by the Santa Casa da Misericordia de Lisboa (SCML), a charitable institution. It also runs a state sanctioned monopoly on lotteries and sports betting. There are more than 5,000 points of sale in the country, plus 10 land casinos.

The SCML will retain exclusive rights over social gaming, but the ministry of tourism will act as the regulator for the new online laws and licensees.

It is the sheer convenience of online betting that gets the thumbs-up from gamblers. It is informal and beginner-friendly for those who might find a posh casino hall intimidating.

Even people who have never been into a casino building or a local bookie’s shop enjoy regularly visiting online casinos and poker rooms.

But opponents say gambling on the internet takes things too far. It crosses the line of responsible gaming by targeting the young, the poor and the elderly where they live, and by bringing gambling into living rooms and onto smartphones, tablets and home computers 24-hours-a- day without necessary protections. It also facilitates money laundering.

The main objections to both traditional and online gambling are the financial risks involved for gamblers who can ill-afford to lose. Those who do lose in quite a big way often feel compelled to try to compensate, with dire consequences.

And then there are the addicts for whom winning is intoxicating, like alcohol or drugs. They sometimes end up losing their cars, homes and families.

The big winner when online gambling is liberalised in Portugal will be the government, of course. The taxes on games of chance will range from 15% to 30%. Sports betting will attract a rate of 37.5%.

The government says the money will be used to “encourage sport and for cultural development.”

But what about the social costs? Can a balance be struck? Is there a way to quantify the social costs and weigh them against the revenue benefits?

Kill the ivory trade, let elephants live

Carved elephant tusks displayed and offered for sale by auction at the recent Algarve International Fair were a timely reminder of Portugal’s long association with the ivory trade and of stepped-up global efforts to protect elephants by stopping commerce in ivory and destroying ivory stockpiles.

“Is it ever okay to sell elephant ivory?” a visitor to the fair asked herself on seeing three elaborately carved pieces said to have originated in South Africa “circa 1960,” with estimated auction values of between €240 and €600.  

Current initiatives in Europe and in the United States are aimed at saving elephants, which have been pushed to the brink of extinction by poachers and smugglers cashing in on the continuing massive demand for ivory.

The pieces were on offer at the Algarve fair the day before Britain’s Prince William teamed up with sports stars, including football legend David Beckham, Wimbledon champion Andy Murray and former South African rugby captain Francois Pienaar, to launch a United for Wildlife campaign on behalf of endangered species.

The campaign is but part of a much wider effort involving government lawmakers and leading conservation groups who are trying to put an end to the trade in huge quantities of “white gold,” first shipped in from the west coast of Africa by the Portuguese in the fifteenth and sixteen centuries.

Over the past hundred years, the population of elephants in African has been cut by half. They are being slaughtered at a rate of 30,000 to 35,000 a year.

Ways to curtail escalating exports of ivory from the European Union to China and elsewhere are the subject of discussions at  inter-governmental meetings in Brussels and Geneva this month and next.

Meanwhile, conservationists point out that any legal loopholes will allow poached ivory to be laundered into the ‘legal’ trade and thus fuel the continued killing.

“Weak European laws on ivory trading are a clear and present danger to Africa’s elephants, and a gift to poachers and smugglers who feed almost limitless demand for ivory in East Asia”, says Daniela Freyer of Pro Wildlife.

Mary Rice, of the Environmental Investigation Agency, added: “We are calling on EU countries to halt all ivory trade within, to and from the EU, and  strengthen enforcement. This includes measures to destroy their stockpiled ivory – both carvings and raw tusks - irrespective of its source and alleged age. We will only be able to end the elephant poaching crisis when the trade fuelling it is banned and demand curbed.”

The United States administration has announced a federal ban - with very narrow exemptions - by prohibiting all imports and  exports and resales of ivory by auction houses and other dealers.

Lisbon is said to have more ivory items stocked by antique dealers, jewellery shops, flea markets and other outlets than any other much larger city in southern Europe.

An academic study a few years ago revealed that of 626 ivory items seen for sale in Lisbon, the most numerous were antique figurines from Europe and Asia, followed by busts and figurines carved in the 1970s from Angola, and antique crucifixes from India, Europe and Sri Lanka.

Nearly all the items seen during the study were made before the ban introduced by the EU Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora in 1989.

Some, however, were being sold illegally because Portuguese law requires that ivory pieces to be registered. Since 2004, privately owned ivory is required to be registered as well, but most has not been recorded.

Portugal already has at least 20 tonnes of registered tusks and the Portuguese authorities intercept several hundred pieces of ivory (both raw and worked) coming into the country illegally each year, almost all from Africa, especially Angola, Mozambique and Senegal.

Despite this, much ivory is thought to be successfully smuggled into Portugal, often hand-carried through the airports. Another source of ivory is the Internet, which enables new ivory items to be smuggled in by post or courier service. Nearly all of it is for personal ownership  rather than for sale.

In February this year, Prince William reportedly told zoologist Jane Goodall that he would “like to see all the ivory owned by Buckingham Palace destroyed.”  He was duly rebuked by his father,  Prince Charles.

Apparently Charles thought his son’s remark was somewhat naive and stupid as there is a difference between supporting action against illegal dealing and Buckingham Palace retaining an  important historical collection of artefacts.

The royal spat was an example of the kind of heated feelings associated with ivory and the killing of elephants.

The same week as the Algarve fair, Spain’s King Juan Carlos announced his intention to abdicate in favour of his son, Crown Prince Felipe, following much irritation expressed by Spaniards since the king’s hunting trip to Botswana in 2012. The trip, which was supposed to be completely secret, resulted in the king falling and breaking a hip after being photographed posing with a rifle over his shoulder in front of a dead elephant.

Wealthy Chinese buyers are reportedly fostering a boom with the illegal  trafficking of ivory from Tanzania and Kenya north to Cairo where backroom markets are busy, even though selling ivory in Egypt is against the law. Ivory bought in Cairo is said to fetch up to ten times the price in China.

The auctioneer of the Algarve company selling the carved pieces at the Algarve fair assured us that, “the owner of the ivory items  provided the valid certificates to accompany the pieces. These certificates were on hand and available for perusal..... we act as agents for our clients and endeavor to work to the rules and regulations governing the sale of all items presented for auction.”

A man visiting the fair who expressed disapproval about the pieces, said later that the woman looking after the exhibits dismissed his objection with a shrug of the shoulders.

The visitor who wondered to herself about the ethics of  dealing in even validated ivory, remarked afterwards: “Having visited an elephant sanctuary in South Africa I can tell you that elephants are amazingly elegant and surprisingly quiet and gentle creatures for their size. All of them had been rescued from botched poaching attempts, some with missing tusks and damaged limbs.

“An outstretched handful of peanuts were gratefully hoovered up by a tiny baby while an older elephant presented a curled up trunk, an adapted trick because it had been caught in a poacher’s trap.”

What she found especially repugnant at the fair was that the carved ivory pieces, “relics of animal abuse,” were on display for all to see close to stands promoting rescue centres, services and suppliers concerned with the well-being of domestics animals.

BLOODY IVORY

Click here to learn more…..

http://www.bloodyivory.org/

The McCann case: opposing opinions

In the midst of the latest phase in the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Sky News presenter Kay Burley entered the fray with an article in the Daily Mirror in which she castigated “conspiracy theorists” and “haters” of Madeleine’s parents.

Burley, a reporter and newsreader of long standing, wrote: “I am absolutely staggered by the number of people on social media who think they know exactly what happened to little Madeleine. Conspiracy theorists believe that it’s only a matter of time before the McCanns are held culpable for their daughter’s disappearance.”

Burley went on to dismiss criticisms of Kate McCann’s refusal to answer questions put to her by Portuguese police, and to belittle what many have read into the findings of cadaver dogs in the McCanns holiday apartment and a hire car they used.

 “Easy to dismiss such claims as Looney Tunes, but even a national newspaper was guilty of claiming the McCanns know more than they have told the police,” wrote Burley.

“As a mother I am offended and appalled by such unfounded allegations.

“Every morning the McCann’s must wake up only to be smothered by a blanket of guilt. ‘ If only we’d done this…’

“They have always held on to the hope that Madeleine will be found alive.

“So as the search continues, please ignore the haters and think instead of two desperate parents hundreds of miles away sitting by the phone and hoping against hope that nothing is found this time.”

This heartfelt standpoint exemplifies one of the most contentious features of this extraordinary case. In the absence of indisputable evidence, two conflicting schools of thought have developed about what happened to Madeleine: one that she was abducted, the other that she died inadvertently in the apartment and her parents were somehow involved in a cover-up.

There was no proof either way in 2007 and there is none today, but it is human nature to adopt a preferred line of probability depending on one’s logical and emotional approach.

It is true that many people hiding in the safety of anonymity or pseudonyms make abhorrent, highly abusive comments on internet sites. In the absence of legal options, indeed they should be ignored.

The trouble with Kay Burley’s condemnation, however, is that in its broad sweep it fails to recognise that many of those who do not accept as a given fact that Madeleine was abducted are not “haters.”

Some of the McCann doubters and critics have probably studied this case in more depth and for longer than most mainstream media journalists in Britain.

They are aware, for example, that back in May 2007 no trace was found of a break-in or a burglary, let alone a kidnapping, at the apartment from which Madeleine went missing.

Well-informed sceptics want the truth to emerge so that justice can finally be done. Their reasoned arguments and conclusions are worthy of serious consideration.

Not everyone believes what they hear on television news channels or read in newspapers. ‘Churnalistic’ and seemingly servile coverage of this case gives rise to distrust.

While there is genuine compassion for Madeleine’s devastated parents, a great many Portuguese mothers are offended and appalled by the repercussions in this country of leaving Madeleine and her siblings alone that fateful night.

The reputations of the Portuguese judicial police, the original lead detective and a range of innocent ‘suspects’ have been blackened in the British media over the years.

To cap it all, the Algarve has been cast recently as a hotbed of paedophilia and the ordinary folk dependent on tourism for their livelihood in Praia da Luz have been subjected to the crass timing of the current search operations.

Obviously this case has been a very public and impassioned one, but simplistic rants in the mainstream or social media are not helpful.

One indisputable fact is that no matter how much anyone sympathises with or is critical of Kate and Gerry McCann, it is still far from clear exactly what happened to their daughter.

Sadly, it is looking increasing unlikely we shall know any time soon.

At the end of a TV interview at the weekend, former Chief Inspector Gonçalo Amaral, who believes Madeleine died in the apartment, was asked: “Will we ever find out what really happened that night?”

He replied:  “Yes, we will. When MI5 opens the case files we will find out. Don’t forget that the British secret services followed the case right from the beginning. On location.” 

Amaral did not predict how long it might be before that information becomes available. 

Praia da Luz, the unlikely scene of such an extraordinary mystery.

Madeleine: what's behind the search?

Many people with a keen interest in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann are hopeful that the latest phase in the investigation will reveal vital evidence that will lead to the solving of the seven-year-old mystery. Many others have already written it off as a waste of time – or maybe worse.

A prevalent view is that the Metropolitan Police Service must have good reason for mounting an extensive ground search to which they have committed a forensic team, ground-penetrating radar equipment, specialist dogs and with heavy earth-moving machinery on stand-by.

The reason must have been strong enough to persuade the Portuguese authorities to allow the search on a piece of private land near the centre of Praia da Luz during the summer holiday season.

The British detectives have been understandably cagey about what they expect to achieve, but it seems unlikely they would have gone to such legal and bureaucratic lengths, and agreed to pay the search costs, only to confirm there is nothing of interest buried on the site.

No one will be more surprised if the police do find a body or any other evidence than Praia da Luz residents who know the site well.  They point out that countless walkers and their dogs have crisscrossed the scrubland interminably over the past seven years.

The area comprises bedrock and soil so hard that a kidnapper or anyone else trying to dispose of a body there would have needed a JCB himself. That anyone unfamiliar with the area could have buried evidence at nighttime or unseen is not feasible, they say.

Credible sources say that some Portuguese Judicial Police officers in the Algarve are among those ridiculing the search operation.

Seasoned sceptics suspect it may be just “a fishing trip,” or even a “whitewash,” part of a plan to try to bring the investigation to a dignified close.  

As ever, speculation is rife. Let’s hope for some clarification in the days ahead. 

The scrubland search area is  slightly inland on the left. 
Photo by Praia da Luz resident John Ballinger.

Near anarchy in the EU election jungle

The European parliamentary elections have resulted in convolutions bordering on chaos - but then what else did we expect from one of the biggest democratic events in the world, which spanned four days, 28 countries and almost 400 million citizens?

The European Union is such a befuddling and annoying phenomenon that a record number of voters in Portugal and elsewhere did not bother to turn out. A record number of those who did cast their vote do not even want to remain part of the union.

A toxic mix of apathy and antipathy produced an abstention rate in Portugal of 66 percent. In the EU as a whole, it was 56 percent.

The low turnout figures – 34% in Portugal, 44% throughout the EU - raise serious questions about the union’s democratic credentials, but more importantly for now, what does the bewildering array of other statistics add up to?

In short, a great deal of confusion and uncertainty.

For starters, a continent-wide protest vote giving unprecedented support to extremist parties has more than doubled the number of seats of MEPs who want their countries to quit or radically change the EU.

A third of the new parliamentarians come from fired-up, factious fringe groups representing a variety of anti-establishment, anti-immigration and anti-austerity views.

In France, Marine Le Pen’s Front National topped a poll for the first time ever by demanding that their country be run “by the French, for the French and with the French,” rather than “foreign commissioners” in Brussels. Le Penn described her victory as “a first step in a long march to liberty” away from the EU.

The far right polled strongly in Denmark and Austria, but in the Netherlands too close an alliance with Miss Le Pen was seen as the key factor in Geert Wilders and his far-right Dutch Freedom Party unexpectedly losing rather than gaining seats.

In Italy, the governing Democratic Party of reformist Prime Minister Matteo Renzi surprised even its own most optimistic supporters by trouncing the eurosceptic Five Star party led by an ex-comedian.

The anti-immigration UKIP party triumphed in Britain where the number of European migrants is almost exactly balanced by the number of Britons living elsewhere in the EU, including at least 40,000 in Portugal. Some analysts think the chance of Britain leaving the EU in the next five years has now risen to 50%.

Angela Merkel’s party prevailed in Germany although it suffered its worst  ever result in a European parliamentary election and saw a right-wing surge from the new Alternative for Germany party, which wants Europe’s largest nation to ditch the euro currency. 

An even more extreme German party, which has been likened to the Nazis, will be sending a MEP to Brussels for the first time, as will Greece’s ultra-nationalist Golden Dawn party, though its leader and several of his colleagues are in prison awaiting trial on charges involving murder, arson and extortion.

On the other side of the political spectrum, the election in Greece was won by the radical left Syriza party. It had campaigned against European leaders for turning Greeks into “the guinea pigs” of the economic crisis and causing “a social catastrophe.”

Disaffection, disillusionment and downright hostility to the EU because of severe austerity and high unemployment secured third place for the Communist-Greens alliance in Portugal.

Despite the maverick onslaught from both left and right, all is far from lost for those who greatly value the EU as a bastion for peace and relative stability in a topsy-turvey world.

In Portugal, the opposition Socialists dominated the election with 31.45 percent. The ruling coalition of Social Democrats and their smaller rightist CDS-PP partner came in second with 27.7 percent.

Overall, the mainstream pro-European centre-right and centre-left groups will continue to hold a broad majority, with the anti-EU rebels too much of a motley crew to form a cohesive threat.

Even the outgoing Portuguese president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, admitted to being a bit baffled after the counting was over. He described the elections as the EU's “biggest test of stress ever”  and said it would take an in-depth analysis to understand the results.

Meanwhile, many citizens of Europe haven’t a clue what MEPs actually do except regularly perambulate at great expense between Brussels and Strasbourg, and complicate what individual national governments and the unelected European Commission are doing.