|
It is easy to understand the government’s intense trepidation at the recent developments surrounding the Ramla l-Hamra controversy.
With very few (and occasionally surprising) exceptions, most Nationalist MPs have been overly cautious in their approach to an issue which has clearly irked, irritated and exasperated a large number of concerned citizens from all hues and walks of life.
 Even Environment Minister George Pullicino, under whose aegis the Malta Environment and Planning authority falls, has distanced himself from the controversial decision to approve the permit application for the redevelopment of Ulysses Lodge. And in a revealing turn of events, the Department of Information last week issued a press release which rejected calls for an inquiry into the application for the time being… while significantly retaining the right to open an inquiry at a later stage.
Something seems to have happened over the past year. After all, it was only last June when government reacted with undue indignation to a public protest, organised by numerous NGOs, against the notorious extension of the development boundaries.
On that occasion, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi had lashed out at what he called “non-serious NGOs”, and even went so far as to demand an apology for an offensive political slogan… for all the world as though the scope of “freedom of expression” somehow stops when it comes to criticising government.
One year later, however, the same government has proved reluctant to enter the fray on what has fast become a major cause for national concern. For although MEPA has tirelessly defended its decision from a purely legalistic point of view, it remains a fact that for the public at large, the Ramla development epitomises a more widespread fear that Gozo will suffer the same inglorious fate as its larger sister island; in other words, that this approval will herald a new age of rampant land speculation and development, which will ultimately destroy what little natural beauty remains untouched in our country today.
The decision to redevelop Ulysses Lodge – which this newspaper strongly deplores as ill-conceived and ill-advised – has therefore served as a catalyst to once again unite the selfsame “conscientious objectors” into a public expression of civil disapproval of what is, after all, yet another symptom of government’s flawed land policy. And this in itself is the single most interesting and exciting new political development to have befallen our country since EU accession three years ago.
The truth of the matter is simple, albeit not exactly music to the government’s ears. Civil society has changed in recent months and years. It has grown and evolved, become more articulate, more demanding, and less amenable to the sort of government manipulation we have so often witnessed in the past.
Compare this to the press conference before the EU referendum in 2003, in which former Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami appeared flanked by dozens of unions, constituted bodies and NGOs, all united under the banner “Yes to Europe”. More recently still, Deputy Prime Minister Tonio Borg tried to pull off a similar stunt by inviting “all of civil society” to back him on a somewhat bizarre proposal to “protect the unborn child”… in a country where abortion is already illegal. In both respects, the message was loud and clear: for politicians, civil society is nothing but a tool to be used in order to create the artificial impression of a unified front when the occasion arises… or to isolate and demonise their political opponents, as the case may be. What a far cry from the kind of civil society that we have seen emerging before our eyes: the kind that takes to the streets in protest against the same party that once (long, long ago) epitomised the struggle against tyranny and abuse.
It is for perhaps this reason that last year, the same government pulled no punches in its attempts to demonise and isolate this dangerous brood of dissenters – fomenting divisions among environmentalist NGOs, and mobilizing the full force of its party to belittle and humiliate individuals who participated in the ODZ protest.
From this perspective, government’s silence today – while not in itself an outright victory for environmentalists – is nonetheless deeply significant. Government appears to have understood the message that it can only dismiss popular discontent at its own cost; and that alone is one small step for Maltese civil society. |
