My new year's resolution (here) was to demand and make better decisions for nature. I sought inspiration from the waggle-dancing of honeybees.
Today, I want to muse about our version of democracy and how those with power and influence can do more for nature.
The context, of course, is May's general election, and the many big decisons that need to be taken in 2015 that will decide the nature of the global climate change deal, the future of the EU Nature Directives and the fate of special wildlife sites like Lodge Hill.
I expect the first to feature as an aspiration in each of the major party manifestos - we have broad political consensus to tackle climate change and that is a good thing. The Nature Directives will be considered too niche to secure a mention, while Lodge Hill could remain a hot constituency issue as it was during the Rochester by-election last year.
Each of these issues hold challenges for those in power but will also become a focus for those who want to influence outcomes. Arguably, the quality of the climate deal will be a function of the diplomatic effort expended by our elected leaders - will they invest the time and energy to secure a deal that the planet needs?
Kittiwake struggling to cope with changes brought about by climate change and in need of greater protection (Grahame Madge)
My worry about the other two issues is that they become pawns in bigger political games as the UK recallibrates its relationship with the EU and the housing crisis intensifies. Vested interests (such as the proponents of housing development on nighingale habitat and those who believe weakening nature laws is the key to boosting economic growth) will inevitably put pressure on the decision-making process. They will be competing with those individuals and charities that are acting in the public rather than the private interest.
Yes, charities seek influence as well. For the RSPB, we would be unable to realise our objectives through nature reserves alone. As we have done for over 125 years, we need the wit and creativity to influence others - including those who wield power - to do more for nature.
Those of you that watch the RSPB closely will be aware that some have recently challenged our activity in this area. I am delighted that the two complaints registered with the Charity Commission by those with shooting interests have been rejected. You can read more here. The RSPB does not hold power but we act in the public interest to meet our charitable objectives. Through evidence, passion and the support of our 1.1 million members we carry influence and together we provde a powerful voice fo nature.
And that's part of good democracy.
If true to its Greek roots, democracy is all about delivering power to the people. People want peace and prosperity - wealth, health and happiness. And there is growing evidence that our prosperity is linked to the health of the natural world. People also love and care about nature - that's why they support, why they visit nature reserves and why over half a million people will take part in Big Garden Birdwatch next weekend. They expect their elected representatives (which form decision-making chambers in Europe, the UK, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and locally) to develop policies and laws on issues which matter to them.
When they don't deliver, then the electorate has the chance to vote them out and let someone else have a go.
And, if some complain that this leads to populst policies that only serve the short-term interests, then the role of any civil society organisation or charity is to make a better case for action for the long term and be more creative about how they can show that the public cares. This is what Birdlife Malta has done by successfully securing this year a referendum on spring hunting - a referendum that all those that care about nature hope they win.
A view of southern Malta showing the density of shooting and trapping huts (Grahame Madge)
And as for the RSPB, we have a long term aim of making nature as popular as sport and as politically relevant as the economy. This is essential if we are to keep common species common and prevent threatened species from becoming extinct.
And you can help. Yes, support Bob for nature, but also, expect and demand a personal commitment to wildlife from your elected representatives. Parliamentary candidates want and need your vote. Whoever gets elected, pester them to make the right decisions for nature. They have the power, but remember that you have influence.
The election is just 108 days away.
I have read this with interest and Martin's latest piece written in the spring 2015 magazine article Carelessness, indifference and greed. It is good to see RSPB winning some battles but my growing concern for Democracy being our main tool to save so much is a bit wobbly today. Why? I am flying the flag for Bob, no doubt annoying my MP with communications and actively campaigning to save my local area from complete urbanisation and wildlife destruction.
The wilful destruction of local SSSI wetlands, OANB and National Trust sites surrounding our town is systematic and a shocking wake up call to careless indifference communities show. It appears freedom for developers to over exaggerate sustainability for immediate profit is very attractive for the short term 'profit' view supporters.
Our local community have given an alternative sustainable long term view, which meets the target volume of housing set out for our area, whilst enhancing and protecting nature, only to be informed that this potentially impinges the EU rights of the Developer! What hope does Democracy have when met with this level of red tape? What EU rights do the people have? What hope does nature have when it is so undervalued with the 'calculator' offering Developer's an invoice for nature somewhere else and a receipt to go ahead where they choose.
The housing policy is intensifying, the EU natura2000 is under threat and localism is struggling. I continue to lobby and propose ecological solutions which are iconic, sustainable and link us to nature. I hope the RSPB continue with their powerful voice and ask all fellow members to wake-up and be counted too, so I, they and nature can sleep at night knowing we have a balance to our future in the UK not just an urban jungle.
I am delighted that the Charities Commission have so roundly rejected the separate complaints about the RSPB's work of the Botham Consortium and the Countryside Alliance. I think it can be said that the RSPB's fast bowlers have bowled them out middle stump each for a duck!!
Can democracy save nature? I think it can with organisations like the RSPB leading the fight for nature. However there are very worrying factors which tend to degrade our democracy. For example, Oxfam report this morning that the wealth owned by the 1% of the richest people exceeds the wealth of the rest of the population put together. This is undemocratic and leads to vested interests having influence far beyond what they should. The newspaper headlines and the television screens give us the short view and many newspapers are politically biased. Wisdom requires the long view. Our politicians tend to pander to the short term "what's in it for me" mentally and ignore the long view.
So there are many formidable factors against which nature has to struggle and only by the ordinary person strongly supporting a large and forceful organisation like the RSPB will nature win through.