The nat­u­ral land is more im­por­tant than the birds

Malta Independent - - DEBATE & ANALYSIS -

Don’t get me wrong. Birds should be pro­tected and since en­force­ment has been beefed up, it is a joy to see herons and birds of prey fly­ing freely. And en­force­ment has made a dif­fer­ence. We should con­tinue de­liv­er­ing ed­u­ca­tion with one hand and ap­ply dis­ci­pline with the other, as should be done in schools.

What I am say­ing is that the law is topsy-turvy be­cause the nat­u­ral land is more im­por­tant for us than the birds. To put it crudely, the birds we can im­port, but once a piece of nat­u­ral land is ru­ined by build­ing, or dump­ing de­bris on it, or be­cause oil leaks from con­struc­tion ma­chin­ery parked on it, it al­most never re­cov­ers. There­fore, that piece of land is lost to us for­ever. So why does the law con­tem­plate harsher laws for the killing of birds and not for the ru­in­ing of our nat­u­ral land? Why is it that the law has loop­holes re­gard­ing devel­op­ment plan­ning but is so spe­cific re­gard­ing birds? I sus­pect that we are be­ing prod­ded by the EU to be more vig­i­lant re­gard­ing birds than tak­ing care of our land. And land in­volves lots of money. And like food at­tracts rats money at­tracts cor­rup­tion. To erad­i­cate rats, you have to ce­ment over ev­ery hole; so to de­feat cor­rup­tion there should be no loop­holes and zero tol­er­ance. It is our politi­cians on both sides who are ul­ti­mately re­spon­si­ble and who bear the onus on their con­science.

We should never con­sider cer­tain projects like golf cour­ses, race cour­ses for cars, and so on, since the area of our is­lands is so small.

Our land is the ba­sis of life. The grass, plants and trees bore into the soil with their roots and suck life from it. The worms and in­sects have a place to live and then an­i­mals make their home and a del­i­cate web of life is cre­ated.

Joe Portelli Nadur

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Malta

© PressReader. All rights reserved.