It was perhaps inevitable that push would have finally come to shove and MP Marlene Farrugia would choose to part ways with the party on whose ticket she was elected to Parliament.

The writing was quite clearly on the wall since she took that first decisive step when she joined in the opposition’s protest against the massive sell-off of Outside Development Zone land at Zonqor Point.  Since at least then, Dr Farrugia has been a relentless thorn in the government’s side – taking stance after stance against her party’s line and in favour of the environment.

She has been a voice for the environment in the metaphorical wilderness of the government’s benches.  She has spoken out fearlessly against what she and so many others have clearly identified as the wholesale of Malta’s natural environment.

That day, it now transpires, was probably the real point of no return: either she would make her own political party see sense and the very clear error of its ways, or the MP and the party would have to part ways.

Given what can only be described as a gross disparity between her own views on the environment and the course the government has chosen at Zonqor and in the two environmental bills currently before Parliament, this state of affairs was perhaps inevitable.

And Dr Farrugia is not, by any stretch of the imagination, alone in her concerns that through these bills the government is seeking to ride roughshod over the environment.

For those who are sceptical of the opposition’s line or that of NGOs, practically all of whom have cried bloody murder, here are some choice quotes from the Church’s own environmental commission’s position paper on what the government is attempting to achieve with the bills discussed in Parliament this week: “Members of Parliament must to put aside any partisan motivation and seriously consider the implications of the proposed Bills relating to development planning and environment.  The Maltese Islands cannot afford to have a weak planning system because of weak procedures and weak planning policies that fail to safeguard the common good in lieu of satisfying the interests of the few.”

“Some of the proposed changes will lead to the collapse of governance at the Planning Authority due to the lack of checks and balances, reintroduce legally-sanctioned ministerial involvement in the planning process and will also create the right climate for corrupt practices.”

It also ‘reminded MPs’ that “serving their country is not equivalent to serving an interest group that seeks only to reap fast profits by exploiting the natural environment or intensifying construction in the urban environment that undermines rather than improves the quality of life of citizens.”

In the face of such observations, and similar criticisms from practically all the country’s environmental NGOs, how can any self-respecting MP who holds the environment at heart allow this to happen without raising hell?

Dr Farrugia’s actions this week in resigning from the Labour Party and going independent show that she has both the moral compass as well as the gumption to do what is right irrespective of the cost.

Now to the Prime Minister.  Yes, he has weathered this mini storm in his stride.  He has been the perfect gentleman in his acceptance of Dr Farrugia’s resignation from the party.  But with Dr Farrugia’s resignation, the Labour Party has lost its voice on the environment.

Now if the government is to attempt to salvage the last shreds of environmental credibility it has left, it should immediately reinstate Dr Farrugia to the chairmanship of Parliament’s Environment Committee, through which environmental laws are passed and other related matters are discussed before making it to the plenary session.

The traditional composition of the committee is of five MPs: three government MPs and two from the opposition benches.  The committee’s chair goes to one of the three government MPs.  Dr Farrugia had served as the committee’s chair until she resigned the position along with her position in the Labour Party.

An independent MP such as Dr Farrugia will have no ‘partisan motivation’ as the Church put it, and as the chair of the committee - essentially having MP a casting vote when PN and PL MPs are at loggerheads – she would be a truly independent voice on environmental affairs.   

This would be an ideal move that would send all the right kind of signals that the government really needs to be sending out right now if it is to somehow salvage its relations with the country’s ever-growing environmental lobbies.

It could also help the government save some face after it flatly snubbed NGOs after rejecting the opposition amendments on the role of eNGOs in the soon-to-be new Environment Authority.