THE KNESSET'S GREENEST DAY

From his opening statement on December 3, 1962, on the Knesset ros-trum it is clear that Ben-Gurion's vision of the new Authority was closer to that of the nature preservationists than to those who supported the establishment of national parks. The Prime Minister took the un-usual step of quoting a previous speech, by Knesset member Yizhar Smilansky, who was also a well-known literary figure, published under the pseudonym S. Yizhar. He had already emerged as the greatest par-liamentary proponent of nature preservation and was openly troubled with the proposed law's orientation. Ben-Gurion apparently sympa-thized and turned Smilansky's speech into Israel's quintessential plea for nature preservation:

It is impossible for man to remain without vistas that have not been mended by his own hand. It is impossible to exist in a place where everything is organized and planned unto the last detail, until all remnants of the original image, the natural and organic signs of the earth's creation, are erased. It is a necessity for man to have a place to go to shake himself off and refresh himself from the city, from the built, from the enclosed, from the delivered and to absorb the refreshing contact with the primal, with the open, with the “before the coming of mankind”—if there ever was such a time. A land without wildflowers through which winds can blow is a place of suffocation. A land where winds cannot blow without obstruction will be a hotel, not a homeland. …^[45]

Eleven Knesset members (MKs), including most of the women in that body, waxed eloquent about the importance of conservation. Leftist Mapai party representative Rachel Zabari led the calls for much broader

---

membership in a Nature Preservation Council, to include scientists, land-scape architects, and artists.^[46] Coached by her friend and kibbutz neighbor Azariah Alon, MK Ruth Haktin praised the SPNI's past role in the area and pressed its platform. Along with many other speakers, she strongly opposed the imposition of entrance fees to parks and reserves. Seven MKs criticized as “undemocratic” a provision that made arbitration mandatory for landowners whose real estate might be expropriated to create parks.

The underlying philosophical and political power struggle between the champions of nature preservation and those of Yan Yanai's developed National Parks occasionally crept through the otherwise apolitical re-marks. Yizhar Smilansky, the nature lobby's closest parliamentary ally, directly challenged the anthropocentric orientation of the law. Yanai had also lined up his supporters. MK Gidon Ben-Yisrael extolled the Landscape Improvement Department's past experience and contributions, countering that it should be granted a central role. All speakers felt the law was late in coming and lamented favorite pristine corners of their beloved land, laid waste by the fourteen years of rapid development that followed independence.

Ben-Gurion's^[47] closing comments, apparently off the cuff, offer one of the most forthright expositions of the founding father's ideas about pre-serving the country's national and natural heritage:

I think that all the speakers, and I place myself amongst them, are imbued with the beauty of nature, of trees, of the sea, of the magnificent mountains, [and] see in them grandeur and loveliness. But I also see this in man's creation. Not just the creation of nature and not just the literary and artistic creations of man, but also economic and technological creations. …^[48]

Ben-Gurion concluded the debate on an upbeat note: “The debate itself may not have changed our country's landscape, but it may have slightly altered the Knesset's landscape.”^[49] The bill passed, with a consensus that a joint committee (Interior and Education) would have to make massive re-visions before its final second and third readings.^[50] The serious politicking could begin.