Categories
Environment

Fuck You Dolphins

We’ve been so happy spotting dolphins all over the island. Clips of the cetaceans zipping contentedly over and under waves have been shared again and again and have also made the news – to the point of getting an archbishop’s blessing. Some experts (we still have some somewhere) told us that this was because there was less noise underwater so the dolphins will come and play closer to the shores.

You barely have the time to enjoy the extra adrenaline rush from this newfound moment of natural goodness that a Minister will come along and spoil the show. Minister Farrugia’s little brownie badge acquired for his new plans for petrol stations had just about found place on his inflated chest when he came up with this blooper: Rubble could be dumped in the sea as a short-term solution, Environment Minister Aaron Farrugia has suggested as the roadworks projects in the country remain at a standstill.

The roadworks in Lija – one of the many asphalt laying projects of the Government of the Best – are at an unacceptable standstill and this because the debris created by said project can find no place to call home. Funnily enough it is actually a question of money since the problem seems to be a disagreement on the price per tonne that has to be paid to quarry owners to accept the debris. I say funnily enough because this government has given us a simple modus operandi of throwing millions of euro at preferred customers in the private sector in order to solve its problems.

It seems however that while our elders may be dumped and crammed into a hotel at exorbitant prices in order to fill the huge gap of inadequate hospital and care facilities (1.6 million euros to Downtown Hotel), while direct orders for illegal batching plants may be the run of the day… while all of this is possible, the quarry owner’s demands are not feasible.

Nope. In this case our option is to take the debris and DUMP IT IN THE SEA. Apparently it is ok because the Nationalists (remember them?) have done it before when building Smart City. There HAD to be a precedent didn’t there Aaron? Because now it will be ok if you go on and proceed to dump debris in the sea in accordance with whatever sick law you lot conjectured together in parliament.

This is the government that often toys with the Gozitan community by proposing to build a tunnel between the islands. I’d love to see that. Really. I wonder where they would plan to put all that debris. In the sea right?

Aaron Farrugia and his hobz-biz-zejt eating half-brained colleague Ian Borg can both stick their heads far up where the sun does not shine (while we’re at it that pea brained excuse for a human Clint Camilleri can join them). Their love of asphalt and development (and hunting) is seriously prejudicing whatever is left of our islands.

Their big fuck you to dolphins today is another nail in the coffin of our environment.

Categories
Mediawatch

Eyes Wide Shut: Santa Lucia & Lady Justice

In my childhood Santa Lucia meant a visit to an uncle of mine. Wikipedia tells me that the village was named after a 16th Century chapel in the vicinity, which is quite extraordinary given how that particular century kept cropping up as I ‘researched’ the background behind my ideas for this post.

The village is really a 20th century invention – ta’ Mintoff, some would say. An idea of a neatly laid out village snuggled between Luqa and Tarxien underneath the Addolorata Cemetery. In my mind I associate Santa Lucia with Mintoffian street furniture – stone benches, planters and some greenery – and an idea of a centre where one would find a grocer, a butcher and some other amenities put together. The village houses that I remember had their front parapets with some greenery.

Santa Lucia’s streets are colourfully given the name of flowers and trees, From Vjal l-Oleandri to Narcis, Petunja, Vjol, Znuber, Rand, Bruka, Iris, Ibisku to Stefanotis – the idea behind a green modern civic centre was there all right. It was a social experiment that to an extent had worked. Lining the village to the north is the Chinese Garden of Serenity. Described in this way Santa Lucia is definitely an oasis of green idealism far from the destructive obsessions that we are used to today.

Santa Lucia – Ville Fleurie

Saints, Cemeteries and Blind Justice

Ian Borg’s latest pet project – the one where he claims to have consulted and not heard any response – involves the massacre of a green part of Santa Lucia (and a jogging track). The cemetery has shifted closer within the confines of the village but instead of the souls at the Addolorata (sorrows) we have the sorrowful sight of hundreds of trees being axed in the name of the God of Vehicles and Progress. A vox pop on Maltatoday clearly showed the anxious confusion of the Santa Lucia residents who on the one hand are loath to criticise anything the government of the tattoed undefeated decides to do while on the other they are visibly shaken by the loss of their immediate green surroundings.

There seems to be no justice when opposing such horrible developments. Blind justice seems to peek through her bandages and always, inevitably sides with the developer, the permit seeker and the tree-slayer. Civil society is reduced to holding wakes for the dying after belatedly realising that the justice’s blindness was rigged. Santa Lucia, the village named after a 16th century chapel will be raped in the name of progress – against the inner will of its citizens but to the sound of much acclaim for this government that privileges development above all.

A blindness acquired

Now to a serendipitous series of uncanny coincidences that I came across prompted by the fact that two figures in this modern fable seem to be associated with “blindness” of sorts. Saint Lucy, to begin with. Lucy hailed from nearby Syracuse and was a great devotee of Saint Agatha (one of Malta’s trilogy of patron saints). To cut a long story short, Lucy died a martyr, refusing to renounce her religion. “The Christian tradition states that when the guards came to take her away, they could not move her even when they hitched her to a team of oxen. Bundles of wood were then heaped about her and set on fire, but would not burn. Finally, she met her death by the sword thrust into her throat.” (Wikipedia)

What is absent from Christian tradition – at least not until the 16th century – is any mention of the eye-gouging with which Saint Lucy is associated nowadays.

Which brings me to Lady Justice. The image of Blind Justice is imprinted in our collective minds. The “blindness” is really a blindfoldedJustice and the reason for it is to guarantee impartiality – justice is applied without regard to wealth, power or status (or it should be). Other symbols are normally to be found around images or statues of Justice. Most common of all are the scales of justice – they have been around since depictions by the Egyptians. The Ancient Book of Death depicts a scales in which a heart is balanced by a feather of truth. Justice is often seen carrying a sword that represents the authority of swift and final justice. Sometimes the sword is replaced by a book representing the law.

But back to the blindfold. I was extremely surprised to find out that early depictions of justice never included it. The Greek Themis and Roman Justitia had their eyes uncovered. It is only since the 16th century that justice has been depicted wearing a blindfold. The first known representation of blind Justice is Hans Gieng’s 1543 statue on the Gerechtigkeitsbrunnen (Fountain of Justice) in Berne.

So there you have it. That chapel that gave its name to the 20th century village of Santa Lucia dates from the 16th century. That’s the century when Lucy “lost” her eyes and Justice “gained” her blindfold. In the 21st century, the village of the streets of flowers and trees is losing its greenery. Justice seems to be looking the other way and the only blindness that is apparent is among the citizens who find it hard to criticise the decision-makers… even if their own quality of life is at stake.

Categories
Environment Politics

Fawlty Towers

fawlty towers_akkuza
Today there are new reports on the latest crazy plan to build another tower in Malta. This time it seems that the Villa Rosa developers are intent on transforming Saint George’s Bay (bayside) into some sort of futuristic megapolis. The artist’s impressions show that most of the foreshore would be taken up by this megalith designed by recently deceased architect Zaha Hadid. Check out the link to see for yourself.

As if that is not enough, just up the hill towards Pembroke another tower is in the planning thanks to the controversial plans to redevelop the ITS land. Controversial because it turns out that lots of investors are furious that the tender specifications were not clear enough. I don’t have any sympathy for the investors really because it’s only just a matter of who puts his name to yet another monstrosity blotting the skyline of poor Saint George’s Bay.

That is just Saint George’s Bay. Sliema Residents are up in arms and purportedly would love for their council to “sue the government” (sic) because of all the scarring building that is going on – towers mostly. Manoel Island is in danger of losing its status as last green patch in the harbour area and a historic house in Victoria is in danger of being pulled down to make way for a car park entrance. Architects may be putting their weight behind an appeal to conserve Maltese architecture but for very one of these there are five more who are ready to pander to the cheque-books of developers hungry for more construction.

There was an admirable action for awareness by those guys pitching tents outside Castille. It’s a sad fact though that the policy makers of this land don’t give a damn about our living environment. I don’t mean trees and plants and recycling and all that. I mean quality of living that is being put in grave danger every single day by idiotic decisions spurred on by money and greed. Is it a childish argument? Yes it is. It’s happening though and the wanton destruction of our prime living space goes on mainly because those at the top have figured that not too many people give a real toss about it.

In the end so long as the policy makers can claim that we are living an era of economic boom, high unemployment, money in the pockets of households, then they know they can get away with murder. From olive trees being brutally clipped at University to prime land being sold off at peanuts to Chinese Investors (guaranteed by Maltese investors’ money in banks) or fake university peddlers there seems to be no hope ahead.

The assault on the quality of life of the inhabitants of the islands of Gozo and Malta has long begun. I could bother you with the usual cliches such as the native American saying that goes “It is only when the last tree has been cut, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then we will realise that one cannot eat money.”

I could do that but it would be useless, wouldn’t it? So long as the money keeps us happy and there’s free childcare and randomly adopted social rights… then it’s a.o.k … we could probably walk on water.

***

Click here to link to the page of Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar a not for profit, NGO, committed to preserving Malta and Gozo’s architectural and rural heritage.

I will add a link to the organisors of the KEA as soon as I get my hands on it.

Categories
Environment

The Environment Front

front_akkuza

Last Saturday’s protest rally in Valletta by Front Harsien ODZ (FHODZ) is being hailed as an historic milestone in Maltese politics. Mike Briguglio listed his own reasons as to why this could be so in his post “Making history from Zonqor to Beyond – the Front phenomenon“. It is precisely the “Front” phenomenon that interests me the most – and this in the wider context of the “beyond” rather than in the limited context of Zonqor.

What is a “front” and how does it fit into the current political spectrum? What impact will it have in the long-term scenario of Maltese politics?

It was rather revealing to read descriptions of the FHODZ on the facebook pages in the run up to the protest. You began with a “front” which is a term that perforce implies battles and wars. A “front” implies engagement – a battle, a struggle. The term immediately recognises activism with intent to obtain direct results. This is not merely a foundation or an organisation representing a set of values – it had a target that necessarily implied direct engagement in the battle. The battlezone too was clearly defined – it was the protection of Malta’s politically defined zones that are outside development areas.

In their own descriptions of the front members quickly segued to the term “movement”. The description of the Front on its facebook page is quite clear in that respect : “Front Harsien ODZ is a citizens’ movement which welcomes support from all sectors of society. The goals of this Front are purely environmental.” The term movement has been monopolised for some time by the Taghna Lkoll wave of Maltese politics – the coalition of interests (and promises) that proved to be the right ticket to ride the wave of dissatisfaction with GonziPN. It is probably with this in mind that the name of the organisation carries the term “Front” and not “Moviment”. That such a choice would be made is quite fitting with the general attitude of the Frontists to stress their a-partisan element whenever they can.

Which brings me to the next defining point of the Front. Great pains were taken (and are still being taken) to stress that the Front is non-partisan – to the extent that some use the term non-political to describe its field of activity. In doing this the Front plays to the same sanitised collective utopic ideal that we have become used to of late when hearing speeches of the Taghna Lkoll camp (typical statements include “ma hemmx kuluri”, “ilkoll ahwa maltin”, “ma jimpurtax int min int u inti x’int”). In this utopia the collective baddie is the partisan politician and the saviour is the new style apolitical politician who supposedly has some form of national interest at heart based on some home-spun mythology or ideal.

The dynamic of political persuasion and participation as opted for by the Front is both necessary and counter-productive at the same time. On the one hand, the Maltese demos has now been fed the spin of “Politicians Do Evil” (and admittedly have had ample evidence smacked in their faces) for quite some time. This is why the Front had to provide a sanitised version of political activism. The Maltese “podemos” or CinqueStelle crowd could only be stirred into political action of some kind by being told that this is anything but political.

Having chosen that delicate road of politics with sanitary gloves and masks on the Front then had to engage with politicians because last we checked this was a working liberal democracy that has also got a role for popular pressure and lobbying. In order to get people on board this had to seem like a protest against all politicians for all the harm they caused and for all the harm they will cause. Even the church got its own dose of hand-slapping for daring to give its two-cents’ worth. The risk at that point was that the Front would be diluted by Pythonesque bickering related to who they where and what they wanted.

The holier-than-politicians attitude would provoke equally absurd reactions such as the infamous “Where were you? (fejn kontu?)” retort. Absurd might the retort be (and wholly ridiculous given the context) but it was a direct corollary of the need of the Front to define their goals in apolitical terms when every breath and step they took was steeped in politics of the finest kind. The very continuity guaranteed by the ever-present environmental activists no matter who was in government was in fact a guarantee of political perseverance and not of NGO oblivion. Which is why the Front was at its best when it could show a full curriculum of political activism as witnessed in the various Mike Briguglios and James Debonos. Their constant presence was as political as it could get – and a proof that the embracing of environmental values in politics is important: far from the ascetic crowd pooh-poohing politics with a big P.

“Politicians Protect Our Environment” read one of the banners at the hugely successful protest. Where does the Front go from there? What are its short-term goals? Are they enough? Muscat has toyed with the Zonqor ODZ as though it were another pawn in a huge chessboard to be moved at his whim and fancy. His latest comments post-protest are neither here nor there: labelling the Front as “extremist”, practically ordering the cancellation of a counter-protest (was it his to cancel?), speaking of a compromise that he apparently reached with himself to go ahead with partial destruction of the Zonqor area.

Is getting Muscat to keep his hands off Zonqor enough? When it comes to the opposition and its commitments, not a day goes by that the Front does not do its best to denigrate any attempt of the party in opposition to wipe clean its slate on environment and take on a new set of values that would be much more than Muscat’s compromise. Shouldn’t the Front be grasping this opportunity of reshaping the environmental and planning policy of one of the major parties as soon it has a chance? The snide remarks and lack of trust will get its members nowhere beyond their Warhol fifteen minutes of fame because when all is said and done and when the last poster is put away it is back to the bigger battle between two parties for the management of our nation and its heritage.

The way I see it, rather than pushing away the PN for its past errors, the Front should be embracing the goodwill of the party and getting it to commit pen on paper to a series of values. All this talk about not trusting politicians because “look what Joseph did once he got into power” is neither here nor there and politically naive. A failure to understand the dynamics of political representation is also a failure towards the people joining the movement with the intention of obtaining concrete results (excuse the unhappy pun).

My idea would be a charter on environment and planning that goes beyond building in ODZ and tackles head-on the environmental challenges for the future. A charter on sustainable development, on the use of current properties, on the preservation of ODZ and natural areas. A serious overall study of the values that should underpin our nation’s future both urban and countryside development. If all this were crystallised in a Charter then the Front’s real achievement would be getting all political parties to subscribe to it. To commit to it. In writing.

Sure you might remain cynical and claim that parties would do it for the votes but then again that is the whole dynamic of representative politics isn’t it? The Front’s role is to create civic aware citizens who are prepared to immediately hold the politicians to their promises. It’s role is to obtain clarity, its battle is to get the parties that represent the people to embrace this clarity and commitment. First in words then also in action.

11059917_10205735736565151_457901184844232376_n

Categories
Environment Politics

The Lie of the Movements

liemovement_akkuza

When Joseph Muscat came up with the idea of backing a Jordanian builder’s plan to try his luck with owning a university, and when Joseph Muscat agreed to place this trial run uni on public ODZ land, he had no idea of the movement that would build up against him. This is the generally accepted storyline as it is evolving. Muscat makes a pact with the devil and sells off another piece of prime national land and suddenly everybody who counts is up in arms united against the tyrant’s move.

The question of whether or not the university is a legitimate educational enterprise or whether it is really a trojan horse for well-heeled arab youngsters to get their temporary visa into Schengen as a bonus add-on to a pay-as-you-go diploma has been mostly set aside. The political debate as it is has almost entirely swallowed the spin that this is a bonus for education in Malta (or as Varist infamously put it  – breaking of the university monopoly in Malta).  Some academics have started to rumble about the lack of transparency in this regard but most of the rumbling is and has been about the violation of Malta’s ODZ – outside development zone – rules.

Muscat helped push the disdain factor to new limits with his “by hook or by crook” approach early on. This managed to unite a number of different lobby groups under one banner – the newly formed Front Harsien ODZ (Front for the Protection of the ODZs). It’s a simple banner to fall under – if you have Malta’s ODZ and their preservation at heart then you can join. The founders were quick to point out the apolitical nature of the front – in the farcical Maltese style of apolitical that still defies real definition.

The actual political milieu had also begun to have its say. While the Front could boast of the support of various NGOs and of course of Alternattiva Demokratika – ever consistent in its environmental battles – its ranks were soon boosted by the rationally vociferous Marlene Farrugia and her husband Godfrey who is also the whip of the Labour party. We also had the admirable Desiree Attard – a Labour councillor in Marsascala who joined the ranks of those opposing the rape of ODZ land.

Was this a Movement in the making? Is this the opportunity to plant a Podemos or 5stelle? Probably not. The only way the Front Harsien ODZ could rally sufficient support is by staying out of actual politics. Popular movements in Malta – real ones with political stands not faux movements glued together with the sole aim of achieving power – can only be created around issue-specific moments. They can be partially successful if they prove not to have a long term ambition of becoming a party (as in contest an election).

Front Harsien is an important reaction of civic society. It is destined though to remain an issue specific blip on the political spectrum. Which brings me to the party in opposition. A number of backers of the Front Harsien have been quick to shoot down any attempt by the PN to make the issue its own. Their reasoning is that the PN track record on development does not allow it to take a stand now.

In many ways this antagonistic approach is flawed. Given that the Front Harsien has no aspiration to become a political movement, the second best thing it could do is to engage directly with the parties in their respective roles. Right now engagement with the party in government means opposing its plans to ruin ODZ whenever they crop up. Engaging with the PN intelligently would not mean acting as though it is the same antagonist as when it was in government. This is the time to get clear, precise commitments from the PN about how it would act when it inevitably – one day – is in control of the reigns of power.

Getting the PN to clearly commit to protect ODZ’s in the future is as much of a victory for the Front Harsien as would be preventing the PL government from ruining the ODZ at the moment. Exponents such as AD’s Cassola and Cacopardo would do better than rant about PN ‘hypocrisy’ because in realpolitik terms when it comes to safeguarding the ODZ it gets them nowhere.

Get the PN to commit and commit clearly and half your work is done. The other half is more difficult. Get Muscat and his jordanian partners to keep their hands off the ODZs… then the work of the movement is done. And the lie of the land will have taken a good turn.