Questionable environmental protection - (letters)
(Mon 18th Jun 2007 - Letters)

Ivan Padovani, Bidnija.

In the wake of the devastating over-development that has taken place in the last few decades, it is only natural to expect increasingly intense resistance to present and future developmental proposals. People are inevitably becoming ever more aware of the scale and irreversibility of environmental destruction that has occurred in past years and will rightly demand ever greater scrutiny of fresh attempts to usurp what is left of our increasingly degraded environment.

Mepa's task is not an enviable one and will become increasingly difficult with every passing year. Its already damaged image suffered another major blow with the highly contentious Ramla l-Hamra decision and the board members have certainly not helped themselves at all with their decision to subsequently boycott the Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar movement. It smacks of a desperate attempt to respond somehow to accusations which have found their mark. People have a right to expect better from an institution that purports, as part of its mission statement, to safeguard "the individual and the environment".

Mepa would do well to reconsider this poorly thought out move.

Helen Wells, Hants, UK.

Shame! Every member at Mepa who was involved in granting permission for the development at Ramla l-Hamra should resign. Their excuse is that they acted within the law.

Euthanasia and abortions are lawful in certain countries but it still doesn't make them right. The government should take the responsibility to overturn this disastrous decision.

Helen Caruana Galizia, Birzebbuga.

The Ramla l-Hamra project should not even have reached the stage of awaiting an Environmental Impact Assessment. It should have been smothered at birth, if not before.

Henry J. Bonett, Sliema.

Throughout history there have been many who sacrificed everything including their life fighting for an ideal. They left a better world and gained the eternal respect and admiration of free man.

There have also been those Sancho Panzas who, against hardship, pursued their illusions to no one's benefit, neither their own.

Some gained our pity, some our warm concern, and our smiles too. Those I understand. But then there are others, our chairman of Mepa comes to mind.

He draws the ire of citizens, practically all and is chastised by his wife. Yet, he still steams on.

I wonder what motivates these people and how will the world judge them?
:: back to news
18 Jun 2007 by