Iktar dellijiet, inqas enerġija mix-xemx

solar rights

Qed jipproponu li lukandi li jeħtieġu iktar spazju jkollhom il-possibilita’ li jibnu żewġ sulari oħra. Nifhem li dawn ser ikunu żewġ sulari iktar milli l-pjan lokali preżentement jippermetti.

L-iskuża hi li bidla bħal din tgħin lit-turiżmu u lill-ekonomija.

Fil-fehma tiegħi bidla bħal din m’hiex meħtieġa. La tgħin lit-turiżmu u l-anqas lill-ekonomija. Toħloq chaos iktar milli hawn bħalissa fil-qasam tal-ippjanar fl-użu tal-art. Għax jekk ir-regoli jinbidlu għal settur wieħed, ġustament ser iqumu setturi oħra u jippretendu trattament ugwali.

Għax għandek tippermetti għoli addizzjonali għat-turiżmu u mhux għoli addizzjonali għall-uffiċini jew għar-residenzi?

Imbagħad hemm argument addizzjonali dwar l-enerġija solari. Il-bini eżistenti madwar dawn il-lukandi ser ikun effettwat ħażin. Ser ikun hemm diversi minn dan il-bini li fih sar investiment f’apparat li jagħmel użu mix-xemx. Dan l-apparat  (pannelli foto-voltaiċi u solar water heaters) li issa ser ikun fid-dell ser ikun investiment moħli.

Tiftakru lill-Labour Party jitkellem fuq solar rights?  Leo Brincat, 5 snin ilu kien qalilna: MLP calls for solar rights as civil rights. M’ilux ħafna li qalulna dan, iżda konvenjentement ġja insew!

Advertisements

4 comments on “Iktar dellijiet, inqas enerġija mix-xemx

  1. FOR EVERY ACTION THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION. YOU CANNOT PROVIDE THE BEST FOR BOTH WORLDS. YOU HAVE TO TRADEOFF BETWEEN WHAT YOU ARE GAINING AGAINST WHAT YOU ARE LOOSING. THE WORST TO DO IS TO STAY IDLE AND KEEP STATUS QUO…. THE GOVERNMENT IS THERE TO GOVERN AND ADMINISTOR WHILST PROVIDE A POLICY THAT IS BACKED WITH LEGISLATION THAT WOULD PROVIDE THE SPACE FOR MORE INVESTMENT WHILST ENSURING THAT THE NECESSARY CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE.

  2. In to-day’s Times this unacceptable and unplanned change from existing regulations met with astonishment from readers. I myself commented thus:
    ”Was the public, especially people residing in close proximity to the hotels, consulted? Were their interests safeguarded Minister Vella, or is this just a fait accompli which does not consider Good Neighbourly Practice -something which MEPA is legally bound to consider?
    Was there a real NEED for the expansion? Can the infrastructure deal with the extra load?
    The public expects answers!”
    Perit Cacopardo provides further serious criticism – not just for criticism’s sake but to make this new administration understand that it needs to stick to the declarations made prior to the last election. Hopefully the Cabinet will wake up to this realization!

  3. Dear Cruz (whoever you are since you hide behind a pen-name!)
    It is not true that a government cannot provide the best for both worlds. It can but only if it considers carefully (not amateurishly) how change will affect the interests of both sections. Malta Taghna Lkoll! Residents living beneath high rise buildings do have rights you know! How would you feel had you yourself been negatively affected by the increased height?
    And honestly was this change required? I fear that it possibly came about to accommodate some individuals. End result: further deterioration of our environment…
    Sad. I never expected this from the new Cabinet for whom I had voted….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s