Moving beyond fake news

The 2006 revised development boundaries and the relaxation of height limitations are still a sore reminder. The PN has paid heavily for this mistake.

Contemporary politics is fast reducing itself to hollow catchphrases. Currently, the new political buzzword is ‘fake news’. Living in a post-truth era underlines the fact that information is based merely on engineered sources. Essentially, fake news is partisan propaganda wrapped in spin and gloss. Truth is only a minor detail.

Sadly, most of Labour’s pre-electoral solemn pledges of public accountability, good governance, zero tolerance to sleaze, transparency and meritocracy have proved to be truly fake news. This has compelled citizens, in particular discerning voters, to further mistrust the political class.

It is within this scenario of distrust and scepticism that the Nationalist Party recently published its latest working policy document: ‘A better quality of life for you’. It is part of a series of genuine attempts at being proactive. The party wants to regain public trust on its laurels rather than on the demerits of its counterparts. The well-researched and comprehensive document addresses environmental issues. The PN seems determined to pin the green environmental colours to its mast.

I have no qualms in saying that through the document the Nationalist Party is facing its own past demon and Achilles heel. Sadly, past Nationalist administrations had undermined its green credentials. The 2006 revised development boundaries and the relaxation of height limitations are still a sore reminder.

That was then. The PN has paid heavily for this mistake. While the current Labour government, against its own pre-electoral sweet talk, has systematically dismantled the necessary checks and balances while encouraging particular developers to make hay while the sun shines, the new PN line-up is set to redeem the party from this environmental deficit. Crying over spilt milk leads nowhere.

One may disagree with the party’s policies but one cannot fail to appreciate its efforts to move forward. As much as it is unjust that one is held accountable for the failings of one’s forefathers, so it is with Simon Busuttil. He is a determined man. He is ready to walk away from the shadows of the past follies. He is not afraid to face the party’s skeletons.

Under his leadership, the party is determined to turn the page and commit itself to enshrine environmental protection in our Constitution.

The party is committed to good governance in an environment in which ‘sustainability will transcend political popularity’.

In my book, learning from one’s wrongdoing, so as to avoid repeating mistakes, is not a sign of weakness but rather a virtue of strength.

Thus, one can comprehend better the background of this document and the party’s recent assertive stand on the Paceville master plan saga, the Mrieħel mega development and the Townsquare project folly.

The document focuses on 16 key environmental issues such as urban development, rural and agricultural areas, biodiversity, water and waste management, noise pollution, air quality, eco-innovation and land-use planning. The document set 171 specific goals. It for example clearly states that ODZ is ODZ and should remain so. Exceptional cases would need parliamentary approval by a two-thirds majority. This is a recommendable and bold proposal. The green lobby welcomed this proposal wholeheartedly.

Of particular interest is the protection of our skyline as being part of our common heritage. The document proposes a national skyline policy. While high-rise developments can be part of the solution, they are not the only solution. Surely, the proposed 22 high-rise developments in Paceville alone are overkill. High-rise developments need to be sustainable within a national master plan, must not be an eyesore to the surrounding landscape and should respect the solar rights of others.

An issue which I would have personally included in this document is the thorny issue relating to illegal boathouses. Not only is there a legal argument in this saga, but there also is a social justice perspective. Are some more equal than others? We need to have the courage to be bolder and further committed in upholding the common good.

An expression which I found uplifting is that “the environment is a reflection of our values”. I fully agree. If we truly pride ourselves in our cultural patrimony and have an eye for aesthetics, then we should stop knocking down architectural gems. If we value our sanity then we need to have more open spaces. If we value our health, then we need to ensure we have good air quality. If we cherish the well-being and the future of our children, then we ought to be promoting the green agenda. If we fully believe that the environment is our only future then we should be guardians of our common heritage.

“If I am entrusted to lead the next government, I will do things differently and I will add new impetus to the protection and enhancement of our environment.” Although I am aware that the proof is in the eating, I am fully confident Simon Busuttil can walk the talk.

For the politically blinkered prejudiced or cynical voter, this document is just ‘fake news’. For the discerning voters, it is a must read. For green Malta this is indeed good news.

(This article was published on Times of Malta – 10 February, 2017)