When the Opposition recently proposed entrenching the right to a healthy environment in Malta's Constitution, Labour's reaction was wrapped in spin so absurd that it is insulting to the intelligence of the public.

Rather than debating the proposal on its merits, Labour chose to twist it into an attack on traditions: this was not about protecting the environment, we were told by Labour exponents, but about threatening hunting, fireworks, and other customs.

And, as so often happens with the Labour machine, once the line was established, every minister, parliamentary secretary and party loyalist began parroting it without question. The disinformation spread swiftly, amplified by party trolls online, until what had begun as a serious proposal to give the environment more attention was reduced to a fabricated culture war.

Here lies another uncomfortable truth: if Labour truly reckons this spin is convincing, then it must have a very low opinion of its own followers. Only the most gullible could believe that the PN's bill - which was about enshrining the right to a healthy environment - would somehow have opened the door to abolishing traditional activities. Yet Labour ran with that narrative anyway, playing on people's emotions and banking on its supporters to repeat it unquestioningly. And many believed it.

The question arises: which is worse - the politicians who knowingly distort reality, or the citizens who choose to believe and repeat the distortion? In this case, both bear responsibility. But the greater fault must lie with those who hold power, and who prefer to defend the indefensible rather than acknowledge the emptiness of their own environmental record.

For the truth is that Labour's environmental credentials are nothing short of dismal. Malta has seen its open spaces shrink at a frightening rate, while the relentless pace of construction has brought noise, dust and congestion into every community. The government has failed to curb pollution levels, lagged behind in alternative energy investment, and allowed water resources to be squandered. These are not the hallmarks of an administration that takes environmental stewardship seriously - they are the signs of one that places short-term gain, often for developers and vested interests, above the long-term health and wellbeing of its citizens.

Labour's sudden decision to publish a Green Paper, hastily unveiled an hour before the PN's bill was debated in Parliament, was yet another exercise in optics. With lofty language about Malta's "vision and commitment to environmental protection" and references to consultation and international agreements, it looked impressive at first glance. But closer inspection revealed little more than an attempt to control the damage, one way of saying that Labour is doing something in favour of the environment - when we all know, or should know, that its environmental record is abysmal.

What was also odd was the pressure that was placed on journalists in the days preceding the parliamentary discussion on the PN bill. Even here, it was clear that Labour wanted to emerge from its refusal to accept the PN's proposal with as little harm caused to it as possible.

But public mood with regard to the environment continues to change. Only two days after the vote, thousands gathered in Valletta to protest Labour's proposed planning reforms, which have been described as a developer's wish-list. Citizens, NGOs and activists came together to voice their outrage at reforms that would further weaken the role of communities, tilt the scales further in favour of developers, and erode what little balance remains in the planning system.

The scale of the protest should serve as a warning to the government. This was not a fringe demonstration but a groundswell of anger from across society. The protesters made it clear: this was only the beginning. Whether the government will listen is another question. If past behaviour is any guide - and this includes the PM's response after the protest - the likelihood is slim. Labour has too often dismissed dissent, preferring to rely on its propaganda machine to drown out criticism rather than engage with it. It is, however, the perfect occasion for Robert Abela to make one of his famous u-turns.

The environment is not an issue that can be spun away forever. The deterioration of our natural spaces, the rising levels of noise and air pollution, the unchecked spread of construction - all these are realities that people experience daily. No amount of government talk can disguise the fact that quality of life is worsening, and that future generations will pay the price for today's negligence.

The debate over constitutional rights may seem abstract, but the consequences are tangible. That Labour's rejection of the PN's bill was followed, coincidentally, by a national protest with the participation of thousands of people is a clear indication that there is public preoccupation about how Labour sees and addresses environmental issues.

The protest in Valletta was a reminder that the public is watching, and that patience is wearing thin. The choice before Labour is stark: continue to spin, distract and delay, or finally confront its environmental failures with genuine reform.

The question is whether it has the willingness to do so.