Is-siġġu ta’ Joseph Cuschieri u George Papandreou

Joseph Cuschieri bir-raġun kollu jrid is-siġġu tiegħu fil-Parlament Ewropew. Wara kollox għandu dritt għalih mhux biss għax ivvutawlu n-nies, iżda fuq kollox għax hu kien li ċeda postu lil Dottor Joseph Muscat fil-Parlament Malti.

Għamel tajjeb Joseph Cuschieri meta qal li l-Prim Ministru ta’ Malta Lawrence Gonzi għandu jinsisti mal-Prim Ministru tal-Greċja George Papandreou biex il-Greċja ma tibqax tkaxkar saqajha u tapprova l-protokol li permezz tiegħu jkun possibli illi huwa (Cuschieri) jieħu postu fi Brussels.

 Veru li Cuschieri żgarra waħda kbira meta qal li Malta għandha (sakemm il-Greċja tapprova s-siggu tiegħu) timblokka l-għajnuna tal-Unjoni Ewropea lill-Greċja biex din tkun tista’ tirpilja mill-kriżi finanzjarja li tinsab fiha frott il-korruzzjoni u t-tmexxija ħażina tul is-snin. Imma dak għamlu għax il-boy għadu ma jafx l-affarijiet sew miskin. Għadu qed jimmatura. U ngħiduha kif inhi, fil-Parlament Malti ma tantx kellu opportunitajiet biex jiftah ftit moħħu.  

Imma ngħid jiena George Papandreou imbarra Prim Ministru tal-Greċja mhux ukoll Mexxej tal-Partit Soċjalista Grieg?  U dawn mhux aħwa tas-Soċjalisti Maltin li illum isejħu ruħhom laburisti?

Ngħid jien ma jkunx għaqli li s-Sur Cuschieri jgħid lill-Kap tal-Partit Soċjalista Malti Dottor JosephMuscat biex jaqbad it-telefon u jkellem ftit lill-Kap tal-Partit Soċjalista Grieg  u jgħidlu biex jiċċaqlaq ftit? Jew forsi diġa ċempillu u injoraħ?

Forsi Joseph Cuschieri jgħidilna ftit, għax wara kollox huwa Dottor Joseph Muscat li l-iktar għandu jgħinu mhux hekk ? 

Living on Ecological Credit

published

Saturday July23, 2011

An informal meeting of EU ministers of the environment held in Poland earlier this month reminded us that we are living on ecological credit. Our balance sheet with nature is in the red. It is healthy that EU politicians have recognised this fact.

Environmentalists have been campaigning for ages that the world is living beyond its means. International NGO WWF, for example, publishes information relative to ecological footprint analysis. From the information available, Malta’s ecological footprint is 3.9 hectares per person. This can be compared to an EU average of 4.9 hectares per person (ranging from a minimum of 3.6 for Poland and Slovakia to a maximum of 7.0 for Sweden and Finland) and a world average of 2.2 hectares per person.

This adds up to a total impact for Malta of about 50 times the area of the Maltese islands. A clear indication of the extent of Malta’s reliance on ecological credit.

Malta’s environmental impacts are accentuated due to the islands’ high population density.

Malta’s small size is in some respects an advantage but this advantage has been generally ignored throughout the years. The reform of public transport, currently in hand, could someday put the issue of size to good use by developing an efficient system of communication. This reform, however, has to be properly managed. Preliminary indications point to a completely different direction. I do not exclude the possibility of the achievement of positive results even if, so far, I am disappointed.

The results the Greens hope to be achieved from the public transport reform would be the increased use of public transport and, consequently, a reduction in the number of cars on the road. This will come about if bus routes are more commuter-friendly. A reduction of cars on the road will lead to less emissions and a reduction of transport-generated noise. It would also cut a household’s expenditure through the reduction of fuel costs.

Water management in Malta also contributes considerably to the island’s ecological deficit.

The commissioning of the Ta’ Barkat sewage purification plant means that Malta is now in line with the provisions of the EU Urban Wastewater Directive. But the actual design of the sewage purification infrastructure means that by discharging the purified water into the sea an opportunity of reducing the pressure on ground water and the production of reverse osmosis-produced water has been lost. The purified water could easily be used as second-class water or it could be polished for other uses. When the Mellieħa sewage purification plant was inaugurated it was announced that studies into the possible uses of the purified water were to be carried out. These studies should have been undertaken before the sewage purification infrastructure was designed as they could have led to a differently designed infrastructure. The system as designed means that any eventual use of the purified water will require its transport from the purification plants to the point of use. A properly designed system could have reduced these expenses substantially by producing the purified water along the route of the public sewers and close to the point of use.

Public (and EU) funds have been wrongly used. Water planners have not carried out their duty towards the community they serve through lack of foresight and by not having an inkling of sustainability issues.

It also means that those who advised the head of state to inform the current Parliament’s inaugural session in May 2008 that “the government’s plans and actions are to be underpinned by the notion of sustainable development” were not aware what that statement signifies. Repeatedly, the government, led by Lawrence Gonzi, falls short of addressing adequately environmental impacts, as a result pushing these islands further down the road of dependence on ecological credit.

The government could have opted for a fresh start in May 2008 by implementing the National Sustainable Development Strategy, approved by Cabinet some months prior to the 2008 election. Instead, I am reliably informed that the National Commission for Sustainable Development has not met a single time during the past 42 months. As a consequence, the strategy has been practically shelved and discarded.

I cannot and will not say that there have not been any environmental initiatives. While various initiatives have been undertaken, some only address impacts partially. Others have been embarked upon half-heartedly. It is also clear to all that government environmental action does not form part of a holistic vision. It rather resembles the linking up of loose pieces of unrelated jigsaw puzzle bits.

This contrasts sharply with the public’s awareness and expectations. The public is one step ahead awaiting its representatives to act in a responsible manner in accordance with their much-publicised statements.

Excessive ecological credit will inevitably lead to ecological bankruptcy. No EU or IMF will bail us out. It’s better to take our environmental responsibilities seriously before it is too late.

Kuxjenza għajjiena

Il-Ministru tal-Ambjent hu Lawrence Gonzi. Huwa bniedem ta’ kuxjenza. Li jgħarbel, jiżen u jaqta’ skond ma tgħidlu l-kuxjenza.

Dan l-aħħar minħabba l-proposta ta’ JPO fuq id-divorzju il-kuxjenza ta’ Lawrence Gonzi ħadmet bl-overtime. M’hux faċli, ngħiduha kif inhi, li tippjana referendum u taħseb li n-nies ser ikollha l-istess opinjoni tiegħek u jmurlek kollox żmerċ! Gonzipn ippjana li jkollu deċiżjoni kontra d-divorzju mittieħda mir-referendum u spiċċa jkollu jħaddem il-kuxjenza. Issa din għajjiet ftit u allura affarijiet oħra jkolhom jistennew.

Ikollhom jibqgħu jistennew ir-residenti ta’ Triq Tumas Chetcuti  f’Ħ’Attard. Dawn ilhom jissaportu l-barriera magħrufa bħala ta’ Wied Inċita. Qed timliehom bit-trabijiet u l-awtoritajiet ilabalbu biss. Il-kuxjenza tal-Ministru tal-Ambjent jidher  qegħda bil-leave għax għajjiet u issa m’hiex f’posizzjoni li tagħmel xogħolha. Kieku l-kuxjenza m’hiex bil-leave il-Ministru tal-Ambjent Lawrence Gonzi zgur li jitlob spjegazzjoni  għal 7 enforcement  notices mill-MEPA tul is-snin fuq din il-barriera :

ECF 254/94, 522/96, 693/96, 367/98, 546/98, 936/98, 224/02

Dawn l-enforcement notices huma dwar il-barrieri Numri 3 u 12. Il-Barriera numru 3 hi magħrufa bħala ta’ Wied Inċita Attard fil-waqt li l-barriera numru 12 hi fi Triq ir-Rabat Ħaż-Żebbuġ. Dawn iż-żewg barrieri jinfdu u huma tal-istess sidien.

Alternattiva Demokratika dal-għodu indirizzat lill-istampa fuq il-problemi li dawn  iż-żewġ barrieri qed joħolqu lir-residenti. Forsi l-kuxjenza tal-Onorevoli Ministru Lawrence Gonzi tqum mir-raqda. Jew ta’ l-inqas ma tibqax riżervata għad-divorzju biss.     

il-Ministru tal-Ambjent : dak tal-lum u ta’ qablu

Iċ-Chewing Gum fil-Parlament

Smajt b’attenzjoni l-parti l-kbira tad-diskorsi li saru fil-parlament dwar il-liġi tad-divorzju. Għandi rispett kbir lejn dawk il-membri parlamentari kollha li iddikjaraw li ivvutaw LE għax hekk qaltilhom il-kuxjenza. 

Imma fil-waqt li nirrispetta l-għażla tagħhom naħseb li b’din id-dikjarazzjoni li għamlu tefgħu dawl fuq il-kredenzjali demokratiċi tagħhom. Għax fi ftit kliem qalulna li r-referendum għalihom kien ikollu sinifikat BISS li kieku rebaħ il-LE.

Tajjeb li mxew skond il-kuxjenza imma l-kredenzjali demokratiċi tagħhom bħaċ-chewing gum.

Water for sale

This advert including the contact details of the person who can deliver the water was published in a recent edition of a property magazine distributed on a door-to-door basis in Malta and Gozo.

I was just wondering whether in view of the current process of borehole registration anyone at the Malta Resources Authority is aware of this advert.

It is clear that water originating from the water table is being extracted through a borehole and sold.

We pay for our water at high prices, and these guys get it for free and sell it at our expense.

Dealing with Environmental Crime

published July 9, 2011

 In late 2008, the European Union, through a joint decision of the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers, adopted Directive 99/2008 “on the protection of the environment through criminal law”.

Member states had to implement this directive by not later than December 26, 2010. Malta, together with 11 other EU member states, did not comply. As a result, on June 16, the EU Commission issued a warning to all 12 states to comply within two months.

The EU directive on the protection of the environment through criminal law does not create new environment legislation. It aims to consolidate existing laws through harmonising penalties that should be inflicted as well as by ensuring that these penalties are really a deterrent.

Annex A to the directive lists EU legislation (some 70 directives and regulations) subject to this directive’s provisions. This is wide ranging and includes legislation regulating waste, GMOs, air quality, quality of water for human consumption, use of sewage sludge in agriculture, use and transportation of hazardous materials, protection of water from nitrates originating from agriculture, trade in endangered species and many others.

Within EU structures, the Maltese government opposed provisions of the proposed directive. So it is no surprise that this resistance is also reflected in the implementation process. This gives a new significance to the Maltese government’s declarations on the importance the environment has in its political agenda.

During the discussion stage in the EU structures, representatives of the Malta government expressed a view contrary to the harmonisation of sanctions primarily on the basis of the economic disparity across the EU member states.

The impact assessment produced by the EU on the proposed directive had emphasised that, in the EU, there are three areas that organised crime focuses on to the detriment of the environment. These are illicit trade in ozone depleting substances, illicit hazardous waste treatment and disposal and illicit trade in endangered wildlife species. A study entitled Organised Environmental Crime In EU Member States (2003) quoted by the EU impact assessment also states that 73 per cent of researched environmental crime cases involve corporations or corporate-like structures.

Organised environmental crime, which has a turnover of billions of euros in the EU, can have a devastating effect on the economy. There are various examples which we can draw upon. The case of the contaminated mozzarella in the Naples environs in March 2008 is one such example. Organised crime pocketed substantial landfill charges for the handling of toxic and hazardous waste, which was subsequently dumped in areas that were reserved for the grazing of buffalo. The resulting buffalo mozzarella was contaminated with dioxin. The impacts on the mozzarella industry were substantial.

Proof of the operations of the eco-Mafia has also surfaced some time ago when Francesco Fonti, a Mafia turncoat, took the witness stand against the Calabria Mafia. We do recall information given as to the sinking in the Mediterranean of about 42 ships laden with toxic, hazardous and nuclear waste. One of the said ships has been located and identified off the coast of Reggio Calabria.

This network of organised environmental crime is so vast that, at a time, it also dumped toxic, hazardous and nuclear waste in Somalia. The warlords in the Somalia civil war were financed by the eco-Mafia. They supplied them with arms in return for their consent to the dumping of the toxic, hazardous and nuclear waste. Italian journalists (RaiTre) who had tracked down the shipments were shot and murdered in Mogadishu.

The dumping of toxic, hazardous and nuclear waste in the Mediterranean Sea can have very serious impacts on Malta. It contaminates what’s left of fish stocks but also, depending on the location used for dumping, it can impact Malta’s potable water, 60 per cent of which originates from seawater processed by reverse osmosis plants.

Given these serious impacts I would have expected that the Maltese government would be at the forefront in implementing the directive on environmental crime in order to ensure that issues of cross-border organised environmental crime are adequately tackled. It is indeed very unfortunate that the tools which the EU provides so that Malta can protect its real interests are continuously ignored. One cannot help but ask why.

Law firm Hugo Lepage & Partners, in a comparative study commissioned by the EU Commission and entitled Study On Environmental Crime In The 27 Member States (2007), repeatedly identifies penalties for environmental crime in Malta as being at the lower end of the scale in the EU. The message that gets through is that environmental crime is treated lightly in Malta. Malta is not alone in this respect: it enjoys the company of a small number of other countries.

Environmental crime should be punished through penalties that are effective and proportionate to the environmental damage carried out or envisaged. It is in Malta’s interest that this is done expeditiously.