TT can be the envy of everyone

Every time I venture to the beaches around our coast I am horrified to see, the unnatural disasters that plague us, the plastic bottle caps, the strong smell of oil, the knowledge that raw sewage is part of the mix or there is a dead non-aquatic mammal floating past. I often wonder what the people both at IMA and EMA are doing. I know the recent PC correct phrase we often use “we are the problem.” I certainly agree but if as citizens there are no direct consequences to our actions, we will go on destroying not just our beaches but our other natural resources. Having ventured into the Bird Sanctuary and watched the Ibis as it nests and changes the trees from green to a powerful bright red, I am again distracted by the floating plastic bag or some other discarded man made object.

Now we could argue that there are penal statutes to deal with littering but what responsibility do the manufacturers of these non biodegradable objects possess? We have no active centres for recycling, so one way or the other, if not by direct littering, these products are destined to litter our shores, rivers and forests. Some responsibility for dealing with these hazards must be placed on the manufacturers. They must be made to take some of their hard earned profits to assist in keeping our environment safe. Criminals in my opinion are not just those who litter but those who manufacture the things which will foreseeably litter our country and so, they too must bear some blame. We tax cigarettes because it is harmful and hazardous and we call it a luxury tax. Should we not deal with manufacturers who use non biodegradable materials in a similar way?

The key is not should we but, can we? Is the existing legislation relevant to our case under study? Our Environmental Manage-ment Authority is a creature of statue being formed by an Act of Parliament. EMA Act 2000. How effective are the environmental officers and inspectors established in section 33 and 21 of the EMA 2000 Act. This Act gives wide ranging powers of entry and inspection under section 22, 23 and 24. How often are our rivers tested? Apart from drowning and or banditry, is it safe to have a Caura lime? Section 5 of the Act establishes that the minister responsible shall set the policy of the authority. Is it not the political will that our environment be one that is esthetically pleasing and safe? I would think that it is. There are added health benefits to us having a policy that promotes the well being of our environment.

Where are the recycle bins, necessary for saving our environment from these non biodegradables? Some clever person may say we can’t get people to put rubbish in normal bins, how can we get them to put it in recycling bins? The proper response is to ask, “how many people have either been charted or prosecuted under the litter act.” Then we can see it is the authorities fault for not inculcating it in us either by voluntary means or on the pain of penalty, a desire to have a clean and healthy environment. The occasional clean up campaign, does nothing but make the problem appear to disappear for a week. An equally clever person may say it costs money to keep things clean and spritely. And again the answer is, it would pay for itself when looked at the long term savings to health, the immediate boost to our tourism.

European cities, Canada and even Barbados are famous for their clean scene! Enforcement of existing laws can add to the countries’ coffers for those unable to mend their ways. I am sometimes disheartened by the continuous battles that organisations like Fishermen and Friends of the Sea undertake, with their placards at the side of the road. I remember sitting it in court when a woman was being prosecuted, it was claimed that she was threatening to kill herself in order to stop mining operations it in our forests!! I know that not all our large corporations are interested in just profit, but also our country, most of their workers live it in areas that are under environmental watch.

Economics and profits are not to be undervalued, without the profits, people would not eat, buy homes etc and so there must not be a confrontational approach but quiet definite diplomacy so that it achieves a win-win situation, and even when diplomacy fails recourse can be had to the Environmental Commission and to sensitising the country not by emotion, but by cold hard facts. And now I turn to these hard cold facts. It is with regret that the University of the West Indies takes it in my humble but possibly wrong opinion, a lethargic approach to our environment. I remember being a member of a very active biological society in my UWI days. I really don’t know what is going on with them now.

We hear little of what is or, is not published about the state of our environment, what are the levels of Pb (lead) H2S (hydrogen sulfied) or pesticide seepage into our drinking water, the levels of Oxygen in our waters and why we can find dead fish floating in schools, what is the migration rate of jelly fish, or other indicators of the health of the ecosystems, all these should be published and in an active column in our many newspapers or radio or anywhere that the public can easily obtain information that would lead to active and healthy debate about the state of the Republic’s environment.

Have I left out anyone? I hope to be an equal opportunity offender. That should answer those who say it is us. Hopefully I have addressed us. I welcome criticism of what I have said if only to open debate that will help save us. Think about it, is it possible to shame anyone into not littering or damaging the environment if they are just adding one more plastic bottle to the mountain that already exists. Another method please! I am aware that the Environmental Commission is new but within its first three  years the court has had to deal with five filed actions, four of which have been concluded and one still pending. Two of the concluded matters dealt with noise pollution and the other two with more weightier legal matters of granting or non grant of certificate of clearance by EMA, both involving rules of natural justice!

One would think that there would have been a lot more matters. The group Fishermen and Friends of the Sea, the extremely courageous Mr Shand and other environmentalists must employ these under utilised mechanisms in achieving the best for our future generations. The Commission has shown that it intends to lead by example. Having hosted an extremely successful seminar earlier in the last year, where many of my colleagues were brought up to speed on what my much maligned profession can do to assist in making Trinidad and Tobago what it can be. The envy of everyone!