From the science of surveys to the persuasion of protests

A government should not cave in whenever a protest is organised. If it did, it would mean anarchy rules over democracy. But when a protest is an expression of what people are feeling, then it would not be a bad idea if the powers that be take a step back and see how they should move forward. 

And when that protest confronts a decision which was never part of the elected government’s manifesto, then the demands of a protest should take on another dimension.

The first environmental protest I recall was in the early 1980s. I remember it was captained by Ray Bajada a well-known DJ at the time, and the late Julian Manduca a committed environmentalist. It was a fun protest—the ones that followed were not pretty sights. 

Since the early eighties, there have been numerous protests and manifestations confronting the two ruling political parties for their environmental faults and deficits.

When at the end of July of this year, a proposed bill was introduced speedily and secretively in the hope that it would not be noted, all hell broke loose. But when it was noticed, green groups and civil society warned the proposed reforms were contrary to what people have been calling for.

Indeed, many thought that after the Jean Paul Sofia protests, the government would be more receptive. People expected a government to be more sensitive to their concerns on the development sector; it was not.

The reforms are aimed at curtailing the powers of the courts when it comes to appeals and to opening the interpretation of certain policies. With a Planning Authority completely in the hands of government, the chance for some level-headed planning is remote. The laws go against the grain of what the government has been preaching.

The protesters reflected the mood in the country, and it would be foolish for government to ignore their pleas. If it were not for these protests, the government would continue with its mission of opening the floodgates of planning permits and twisting planning policies simply to ensure that the same posse of big boys continue to rake in millions.

No one is arguing construction should end. But construction is not an economic component, but a segment of a component that drives an economy. To continue feeding a monster which depends on more land, less height limitation, more stress on our roads, water, sewage and electricity and more foreign workers, is simply suicidal.

The Labour Party has always had an awkward understanding of the environment. It cannot boast of being remotely green, and has a history of screwing up when it comes to environmental policies. 

The Nationalist Party is not too far behind, but it has been more receptive to the demands of society. All parties still tremble when faced with the developers’ lobby.

Robert Abela is in a quandary and caught between a rock and hard place. He knows that he cannot slow down the construction industry and cannot afford to inflame the lobby. But he also knows that he has an angry mob at his door.

They are the new class of voters who have little interest in the freebies that will come with political budgets. This new class of voters are more motivated by altruism and a wish that their country does not continue to turn into an urban sprawl that has no soul.

There is a sense of frustration out on the street, and concerns are not limited only to environment, land use and construction but also about the cost of living, traffic and population. The government is always to blame, even though some of the problems are created by us. It follows that a wise politician would take cognisance of these, more so when a new political Opposition leader is finding his feet and in honeymoon mode.

Which brings me to the issue of polling political allegiances. Today, this newspaper publishes yet another survey. It is not a one off, and is customary that MaltaToday surveys appear at the beginning of the month. It has always been the case since the first surveys of 2002. 

I have said this, but I say it with once again. We do not play with numbers, and we do not invent numbers. Surveys are not the bible, they have their flaws, but give indications and lay out trends. 

We also do not believe that our surveys are the only ‘good’ surveys. But we will defend our reputation because we have a transparent system which is backed by a solid and logical methodology.

There is however one important element in the surveys today being held in Malta. They are confronted by the new party of non-voters which is close to 20% of all registered voters. To read their minds is complex and not straight forward.

Over the years, I have had to face the wrath and questioning of numerous politicians and lobbyists about our polls. I will defend the processes we uphold and will argue that polls are polls, and the final test is the election.

But those who choose to ignore polls, do so at their own expense.

Today’s poll shows a trend is both expected and a natural reaction to the recent changes in politics.  To read the result one needs to take some time and look at the numbers. Numbers that whatever is being insinuated and said are based on truthful unadulterated responses.