Some special interest groups still manage to do pretty well even in partial lockdown. Hunters have recently been flying high.
In March, Birdlife had reported rampant illegal finch trapping along the coast in Malta and Gozo. The usual police in charge of supervising hunting were apparently absorbed into COVID-19 duties. Yet still, a spring hunting season was opened in April.
The government then promptly resurrected a proposal to give the woodlands at l-Aħrax tal-Mellieħa and Miżieb to hunters under a formal management agreement.
Hunters claim that in 1986 then prime minister Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici had placed this area under their administration. It follows, according to them, that they can identify ‘trespassers’ on the site.
If anyone were in doubt, this is the huge difference between placing natural open spaces under the management of environmental NGOs or giving them to a group of hunters.
NGOs manage sites on behalf of the public, opening them to everyone. Any restrictions exist to safeguard the landscape and biodiversity, and not to enable the NGOs and their members to enjoy the place and keep everyone else out.
The general understanding, according to European definitions, is that an NGO is not-for-profit and independent of government. Moreover, NGOs are not managed for personal gain and their activities should contribute to the public good. NGOs promote many issues, such as human rights, gender equality, the environment or humanitarian action.
A club acting primarily in the interests of its members, like a sports or hobby club, may be a voluntary organisation but is not an NGO, under that definition. In their approach to Miżieb, hunters act and manage public land primarily in the interests of their members, and not for the common good.
Dubious and downright bad planning decisions rule the day, and the Planning Authority’s reputation is at a monumental low
Over the years, regular calls have been made, including by the European Court of Auditors, to establish a common definition of NGOs throughout Europe. In Malta, for instance, the law does not distinguish between civil society organisations, or NGOs, and other voluntary associations.
Politicians counting voters and pandering to specific lobbies is nothing new. Another favourite in the corridors of power is the construction lobby, with its revolving door used by far too many politicians.
Green milestones and expectations
Today, the so-called ‘green lobby’ is politely tolerated at the political show yet never quite given the VIP seats. But recent history shows that small, determined and focused groups sometimes spill out of their usual corners.
The pattern is that the trickle suddenly overflows, transformed into big, strong waves of people. We saw an instance of this, on completely different concerns, at the end of last year with all those demonstrations in Valletta and the eventual resignation of the prime minister.
Environmental activism can have big impacts too. Some turning points are milestones, going beyond campaigns on particular controversial building projects.
Firstly, the move to becoming an independent nation in 1964 triggered an increased interest in national identity, and in Malta’s cultural and natural heritage. This coincided with the 1960s building boom, with its rapid and brutal transformation of Malta.
In this climate, the first three civil society groups focusing on the environment or cultural heritage emerged. Today’s Nature Trust and Birdlife can trace their beginnings to around 1962, and Din l-Art Ħelwa was founded in 1965.
Over the next two decades, huge ‘free-for-all’ environmental damage was inflicted. The Building Development Areas Act of 1983 went even further, enabling development outside the boundaries of the former schemes. The sprawl into the countryside seemed unstoppable.
Yet another shift of mood occurred the mid-1980s, in the wake of the planning devastation associated with the works minister of the day, Lorry Sant. Amid growing political unrest, Żagħżagħ għall-Ambjent (Youths for the Environment) was founded in 1985, later becoming Moviment għall-Ambjent. This overlapped with the emergence of Alternattiva Demokratika, Malta’s green party.
These new groupings were a second important milestone in Malta’s green activism.
Since then, environmental organisations, single issue activist groups and grassroots movements have proliferated and continue to wax and wane with the issues of the day.
A third milestone for environmental activism occurred around 2006. The build-up was the plummeting reputation of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, with a string of controversial major projects constantly in the news. The tipping point was the government’s decision to extend the development boundaries, with the issuing of new local plans.
The outcry threatened to influence the results of the national election in 2008, and led to an attempt by the government to introduce widespread reforms in the planning sector over the following years. The green lobby had discovered the potential strength and power of its voice – and politicians had responded.
It followed that one of the prominent electioneering promises of the Labour Party, which influenced the change of government in 2013, was a promise of renewed reform in the planning and environmental sector.
The split of MEPA was finally implemented in 2016. But this did not bring tangible improvements. Dubious and downright bad planning decisions rule the day, and the Planning Authority’s reputation is at a monumental low. People are incensed and fed up, and the number of activist groups is on the rise.
When Robert Abela took office as prime minister a few months ago, one of his first moves was to reunite the environment and planning authorities under one ministry. Will this be a green milestone? Its potential has yet to be realised. My expectations are raised.
For now, the quiet streets of social distancing have reminded many of us of more tranquil, less polluted times before the concrete jungle around us grew so dense and thick.