Getting blocks of flats approved on his home island of Gozo seems to have become Joe PortelliвЂ™s raison dвЂ™etre, with one faceless monolith after the other sprouting like mushrooms all over the sister island. When it comes to the environment, the PL and the PN exhibit a masterful sleight of handвЂ¦ promising to prioritise the environment without biting the bullet and tackling the real issues so as not to alienate the considerable number of voters making a buck out of construction. The further protection of MaltaвЂ™s Natura 2000 network, which includes all the ecologically-important terrestrial and marine sites, barely features within the two main electoral programmes, probably since formulating such a programme is an exercise in populism. Pledges for more landscaped family parks and picnic areas and to subject large-scale ODZ development to a two-thirds parliamentary majority is childвЂ™s play, given that it will resound with voters concerned with over-development without ruffling developersвЂ™ (large and small) feathers, given that most ODZ development currently being proposed consists of small-scale projects submitted by individuals. Similarly, as rightly recently decried by MaltaвЂ™s largest environmental NGOs, the PLPN proposals do not address the elephant in the room вЂ“ biodiversity and habitat loss вЂ“ probably because these concepts are still alien to many voters. Neither the PL nor the PN have had the elusive chutzpah to call for an overhaul of the RPDG, given that a less permissive Planning Authority would lose them votes. In the past 10 odd years that such policies have been put into practice, for instance, countless and dodgy applications for agricultural stores, stables, residential extensions to existing farmhouses, sheep and poultry farms and a dazzling array of farm-related amenities would suggest that there is a current resurgence of agriculture on these islands.Д«ut, while it is ironic that land abandonment is a widespread occurrence, with farmers becoming increasingly disillusioned with prospects for the sector and throwing in the towel as a result, requests for ODZ developments linked with farming have spiralled, as genuine farmers give way to opportunistic land developers acting under the guise of farmers. The elation sours into dejection and downright vexation, however, when one scratches beyond the surface of such pledges, proving right once again the adage that the devil lies in the detail.ДЇor instance, this column, along with others, has, since 2013-2014, been decrying the unadulterated abuse ushered in by the revised ODZ policies approved in 2014 and known by the RPDG (rural policy and design guidelines) tongue-twister. This is all fine and dandy and should be reason enough to rejoice, especially when considering that environmental issues barely made a mention within electoral pledges up till 10-15 years ago. So much so that terms such as ODZ, public green spaces, renewable energy, electric cars, public transport, new modes of transport, restoration, picnic areas, parks and afforestation have been mainstreamed within the ongoing electoral campaign. Having consistently featured as one of the top-scoring concerns in public perceptions surveys, the environment predictably attracted more than a cursory look by those contesting next weekвЂ™s elections.

Read biting the bullet online