When push comes to shove, it is always the rights of future generations which are ignored and thrown overboard. This is done repeatedly as governments tend to give greater value to the rights of present generations, in the process discounting the rights of the future.
It is a recurring theme in all areas of environmental concern. Whether land use planning, water management, resource management, waste management, climate change, biodiversity or air quality, procrastination is the name of the game. Coming up with 101 excuses, governments postpone to tomorrow decisions that should have been implemented yesterday.
Future generations have a right to take their own decisions. It is pretty obvious that they will not be able to take adequate decisions because their options will be severely curtailed as a result of the implementation of present and past decisions.
The politics of sustainable development aims to address this deficiency.
On a global level, it all started in Stockholm in 1972 as a result of the sensitivities of the Nordic countries which set in motion the UN Human Environment Conference.
After the publication of the Brundtland Report in 1987, the Rio summits (1992 and 2012) and the Johannesburg summit (2002), we can speak of charters, international conventions, declarations and strategies, all of which plot out in detail what is to be done.
However, as pointed out by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon at the UN Rio+20 summit (2012) in his report, entitled ‘Objectives and themes of the United Nations conference on sustainable development’, institution building has lagged behind. This signifies that the integration of policymaking and its implementation is nowhere on target, Malta not being an exception.
The Sustainable Development Annual Report 2013, presented in Parliament by Minister Leo Brincat on May 27, indicates that not much progress has been made to date on the matter, notwithstanding the number of meetings and the appointment of coordinating officers and focal points in each of the ministries.
Way back in 2008, Malta had a National Sustainable Development Commission which, through the input of civil society, in coordination with government involvement, had produced a National Sustainable Development Strategy. This had been approved by Cabinet at the time but never implemented.
In an effort to justify its inertia, the government had tried to divert attention in 2012 by proposing a Sustainable Development Act. This, essentially, transferred (with changes) some of the proposed structures and institutions identified in the National Sustainable Development Strategy to the legislation and used the process as a justification for not doing anything except talk and talk.
The changes piloted through Parliament by then Environment Minister Mario de Marco included the effective dissolution of the National Commission for Sustainable Development (which had been dormant for five years). To justify this, the permanent secretary at the ministry came up with the excuse that the commission was too large and, hence, was of no practical use.
It has to be borne in mind that sustainable development is also an exercise in practical democracy whereby policy is formed through capillarity, rising from the roots of society, and not through filtration by dripping from the top downwards. For sustainable development to take root, the strategy leading to sustainability must be owned by civil society, which must be in the driving seat of the process.
The politics of sustainable development requires much more than chatter
Readers may remember that the President’s address to Parliament way back on May 10, 2008 had emphasised that: “The government’s plans and actions are to be underpinned by the notion of sustainable development of the economy, of society and of the environment. When making decisions today, serious consideration will be given to the generations of tomorrow.”
This was not manifested in the government’s actions throughout its five-year term. Not just in its approach to sustainable development but also in its dealing with the individual issues of environmental concern: be it land use planning, water management, resource management, waste management, climate change, biodiversity or air quality.
The politics of sustainable development is an uphill struggle. It signifies a long-term view in decision-making, that is, considering carefully the impacts of today’s decisions on tomorrow. It requires much more than chatter.
As the report tabled by Brincat states in its conclusion, we are in for more chatter as the emphasis in the coming year seems to be the revision of a strategy that has never been implemented.
The strategy is worded in such general terms that it is difficult to understand what this means, except that there is no practical interest in getting things done.
It would have been much better if some effort were invested in the action plans which the different ministries have to draw up in order to implement the strategy in the various departments/authorities under their political responsibility.
This, it seems, is unfortunately the Maltese long-term view.
cacopardocarm@gmail.com
http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com
Carmel Cacopardo is deputy chairman of Alternattiva Demokratika.