The general convention Idea Ambjent organised by the Nationalist Party was the first ever convention on the environment convened by one of the main parties, a subject which many politicians across the board, and many commercial communities usually shun, avoid and distance themselves from. It was a courageous positive initial step.
This convention offered an opportunity for all those who wanted to speak their minds, irrespective of their political or religious leaning, or academic level, whilst politicians sat, listened and ruminated.
A substantial number of stakeholders participated. There were young environmentalists in the making, and also seasoned ones; students, and representatives from the various layers of society, including various NGOs. Some seem to have shied away and stayed at home thus not benefitting from the opportunity to publicly declare their environmental aims and worries. Others took a wall-flower stand, though admittedly there was not enough time to enable everyone to make a point.
In-depth, specific, general, critical, academic, popular, educational, social, trade unionistic suggestions and comments were aired without any hesitation or embarrassment. All inputs showed conviction, belief, yearning and commitment for a better environmental future in a professional way. The voices were strong, convinced, following an ever increasing public awareness, a yearning for better appreciation and environmental protection, and need for more responsibility and good governance in such an important unique, life-dependency matter.
Different approaches, different styles, different aspects were all expressions of the will, the determination, the concern over our environment – in the widest sense possible. Stakeholders expressed fears of the negative impacts on the well-being of the population, unless measures to restrain the abuses, the mismanagement, the destruction, the up-for-sale and grab-and-go mentality is not curbed. All were of the same opinion towards the common good.. except for one.
Speaking with a blinkered pro-business salesman vision, a lonely voice tried to convince participants that environment and development can never see eye to eye. To the extent that this was compared to the disagreement between husbands and wives.
Different approaches, different styles, different aspects were all expressions of the will, determination and concern over our environment
I had to pinch myself hard, very hard to convince myself that I was not dreaming, even more so when I heard that the shambles the environment is in is all the fault of environmentalists because developers never exploit virgin land. There was a confounded expression of failure with every spoken word.
Such an outburst of pro-business vision made me drift, as I am sure many did, to the most recent issues at Żonqor Point and at Munxar area, where two hotels, camouflaged in bay-laurel leaves, are being planned… on public virgin land.
This was the only non pro-environment intervention during the general convention, a very feeble attempt not to rock the boat too much as it manoeuvred through Scylla and Charybdis, while trying to convince the audience that a circle is square. It is the same blinded, pro-business vision that has had some success in luring a few politicians towards the hand of the golden calf, while throwing overboard any social and environmental considerations.
But fortunately enough, this same blinded pro-business vision is also the catalyst, the driving force behind a fast gathering momentum of public awareness, which is getting stronger, more eager, more vociferous and more intent on expressing in no uncertain terms the need to stop the environmental haemorrhage which is leading to social death.
Pope Francis’ teachings, in his letter Laudato Si’, which I consider as the constitution for humanity (irrespective of any religious belief), refers to economic activity as a noble vocation. Economic activity can contribute to society and to the protection of the indispensable life-bearing environment. When such activity is sustainable, economy and ecology walk hand in hand. It is only when such economic activity is not sustainable that it does not see eye to eye with social and ecological interests.
Unsustainable development leads to the profitable greed of the few at the expense of the many: society and the environment. Thus unsustainable development can never be accepted by the many who unwillingly have to pay through their noses for the exorbitant hidden costs. And unsustainable development is not only detrimental to society and the environment, but also to development itself. Scientific data on climate change is just one example which every sceptical entrepreneur cannot deny.
What will be the next steps following such a general convention where the strong determination and yearning for a better future, more well-being (not just financial), better assurance for the protection of our environmental home, and more responsibility and good governance, were on everyone’s lips?
How will the commercial, the religious, the trade unionistic, the media, the legal, and above all the political entities respond to such a strong call to deliver? The message addressed to all these social entities, who have all been given the responsibility to achieve such aims, is very loud and clear.
Social and environmental good governance is eagerly awaited, before it is too late. It will then not be at all possible to control and reverse damage done especially in this country which has possibly already surpassed its carrying capacity.
“Here is your country. Cherish these natural wonders, cherish the natural resources, cherish the history and romance as a sacred heritage, for your children and your children’s children. Do not let selfish men or greedy interests skin your country of its beauty, its riches or its romance.” (Theodore Roosevelt)