TimesTalk u l-Koalizzjoni

new-identity.jpg

TimesTalk nhar it-Tlieta li għaddew reġa’ qajjem mill-mewt l-idea ta’ koalizzjoni  f’Malta billi lejn l-aħħar tal-programm staqsa lill-Kap tal-Opposizzjoni jekk jeskludix (fil-futur) koalizzjoni ma’ Alternattiva Demokratika.

Simon Busuttil, ġustament, wieġeb li ma jeskludix.

Dal-għodu Arnold Cassola ikkummenta mat-Times li dan hu kollu ħolm (pie in the sky) ! U hekk hu.

Għad baqa’ tlett snin sal-elezzjoni ġenerali u sa dakinnhar min jaf kemm jinbidlu affarijiet. Kemm għad isiru kalkoli u paroli.

Jekk għadx ikun hemm min ikun imħajjar jikkunsidra koalizzjoni jiddependi minn kif ser tittrasforma ruħha l-politika Maltija minn issa sa tlett snin oħra. Tista’ tinbidel ftit jew inkella ħafna, u tista’ tibqa’ kif inhi! Ilkoll nafu li kif qal darba Harold Wilson, Prim Ministru u Kap tal-Partit Laburista Ingliz: fil-politika anke ġimgħa hu żmien twil ħafna. Aħseb u ara tlett snin!

Mela meta tiġi naraw.  Din ukoll kienet is-sustanza tal-kummenti tal-Professur Henry Frendo lit-Times dal-għodu.

Sadanittant nibqgħu iffukati fuq il-11 t’April. L-elezzjonijiet tal-Kunsilli Lokali u l-ewwel referendum abrogattiv biex tispiċċa darba għal dejjem il-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa.

 

Il-mistoqsija tal 11 t’April

LE

Il-mistoqsija li ser ikollna quddiemna fir-referendum abrogattiv hija importanti. Għax meta ngħidu IVA jew LE dan ser ngħiduh bi tweġiba għall-mistoqsija li jkollna quddiemna.

Il-mistoqsija li ser inwieġbu hi din :

Bil-Malti

Taqbel illi d-dispożizzjonijiet tar-“Regolamenti dwar Qafas biex Tiġi Permessa Deroga li Tiftah l-Istaġun għall-Kaċċa tal-Gamiem u tas-Summien fir-Rebbiegħa” (Leġislazzjoni Sussidjarja 504.94) għandhom jibqgħu fis-seħħ?

Bl-Ingliz

Do you agree that the provisions of the “Framework for Allowing a Derogation Opening a Spring Hunting Season for Turtle Dove and Quail Regulations” (Subsidiary Legislation 504.94) should continue in force?

 

Id-dokument tal-vot ikun fih din il-mistoqsija (kemm bil-Malti kif ukoll bl-Ingliz) u mbagħad taħt il-mistoqsija ikun hemm iz-zewġ kaxxi kif jidher hawn fuq : waħda bl-isfar fejn tivvota IVA/YES u l-oħra bil-kannella fejn tivvota LE/NO.

Il-mistoqsija hi waħda ċara. Tistaqsina jekk naqblux jew le mar-regolamenti li jippermettu li jkun hawn kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa. Min jaqbel li l-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa tibqa’ jivvota IVA u min ma jaqbilx  jivvota LE.

Pinocchio qiegħed jistħi

pinocchio 2

 

Segwejt dak li qed jirrappurtaw il-ġurnali online dwar ix-xhieda li Giovanni Kessler Direttur Ġenerali tal-OLAF qiegħed jagħti fil-kumpilazzjoni ta’ Silvio Zammit.

Fix-xhieda, kif tistgħu taraw fir-rapporti jissemmew €60 miljun bħala l-ispiża biex is-Snus ma jibqax ipprojibit fl-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Waħda mill-gazzetti semmiet lil Pinocchio fir-rappurtaġġ tagħha.

Immedjatament ħarġet stqarrija ta’ John Dalli li fiha qed jakkuża lil Giovanni Kessler li qiegħed jigdeb.

Ovvjament xi ħadd qiegħed jigdeb bil-goff. Tant li naħseb li anke Pinocchio kien jistħi.

The bullying continues

turtle doves just shot

 

Earlier this week the Ornis Committee recommended that the next spring hunting season should be opened. The government  obliged on  Thursday by declaring that, subject to the result of the abrogative referendum, the spring  hunting season for turtle dove and quail will open on Tuesday 14 April and will close on Thursday 30 April.

The Ornis Committee is appointed by the government in terms of regulation 10(2) of the Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations. Its role is one of advising the Minister for the Environment on various aspects relative to the implementation of the regulations.

The Ornis Committee decided to recommend in favour of the opening of the spring hunting season by three votes in favour with a solitary vote against. The hunters’ representatives on the Ornis Committee voted in favour, whilst those from Birdlife voted against the opening of the spring hunting season. The additional support for spring hunting came from two “independent” members appointed by the government on the Ornis Committee. The chairman and the MEPA representative both  abstained from voting.

Why all this fuss?

It is because on the eve of an abrogative referendum the recommendation is unethical. In addition, it flies straight in the face of scientific evidence which, without a shadow of doubt, proves (if any such proof was ever required)  that the hunting of turtle dove and quail in spring is unsustainable.

The evidence comes from official reports released by the Ministry for Sustainable Development, the Environment and Climate Change, confirming that both quail and turtle dove numbers are at an all time low across Europe. The reports further show that the numbers of quail migrating over Malta are actually higher in autumn than in spring, negating two common arguments made use of by those lobbing in favour of  spring hunting.

The official report compiled by the Wild Birds Regulation Unit on the conservation status of quail and turtle dove gives the most recent data on the two species, showing that the turtle dove have even declined again in recent years. A decrease of a further three per cent since 2012 brings the total reduction in their European population to 77% since 1980.

This report confirms that both quail and turtle dove are in decline across Europe, with their numbers at an all time low. It therefore doesn’t make sense to shoot them in spring when they are on their way to breed, as their numbers don’t get a chance to recover.

Malta is the only country in Europe to shoot migrating turtle dove and quail on their way to breed … and this just for pleasure. Official scientific reports now make it clear that these species are in trouble across Europe and we need to give them a chance. There is no justification for spring hunting

A second report, with the results of a government commissioned study on the migration of turtle dove and quail during the autumn 2014 hunting season, was published on 2 March. One of the arguments for spring shooting is that hunters claim not enough of the birds pass over Malta in autumn for them to shoot. Yet the independent study shows that more quail actually migrate through Malta during the autumn season than in spring.

This scientific study concludes that the numbers of quail flying over Malta during the autumn hunting season are actually higher than in spring, completely undermining one of the hunters’ arguments for a spring hunting season.

The report concluded that 45,683 quail and 7,956 turtle dove migrated over Malta during September and October 2014, during an autumn hunting season.  In spring, hunters are allowed to shoot a total of 16,000 of both species combined because they have argued that they do not have enough birds to shoot in autumn.

Faced with this scientific evidence, which confirms what we have known all along, the recommendation of the Ornis Committee does not make sense. It can only be interpreted as a last stand of defiance. Hunting sympathisers still believe that they can bully their way through.

Voters have only one way of stopping this bullying: voting NO on 11 April.

 

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday 15 March 2015

Permezz tal-arti napprezzaw in-natura u nsaħħu d-demokrazija

Giovanni Bonello.130315

 

Id-diskors li għamel il-bieraħ l-Imħallef Giovanni Bonello intlaqa’ tajjeb minn kulħadd. Id-diskors ta’ Vanni Bonello kien ċelebrazzjoni tad-demokrazija permezz tal-arti u l-apprezzament tan-natura.

Tkellem fit-tul dwar kif permezz tal-arti nistgħu napprezzaw iktar in-natura. Kienet opportunità ukoll biex sellem il-memorja ta’ Maurice Caruana Curran li miet iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa. L-Imħallef Maurice Caruana Curran kien wieħed mill-pijunieri f’Malta tal-attiviżmu ambjentali bit-twaqqif 50 sena ilu ta’ Din l-Art Ħelwa.

Giovanni Bonello emfasizza l-importanza tar-rwol tas-soċjeta ċivili li bl-użu tal-għodda demokratika tar-referendum abrogattiv qed tieħu lura l-poter li tiddeċiedi mingħand il-politiċi li tul is-snin kienu mhedda u rikattati kontinwament mil-lobby tal-kaċċaturi.

Vanni Bonello kien imdawwar mill-artisti li b’ġenerosita kbira irregalaw il-pitturi tagħhom lill-kampanja kontra l-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa . Kien f’waqtu ukoll għalhekk il-kumment ta’ Vanni Bonello illi l-ebda delizzju m’hu mhedded mir-referendum abrogattiv.

Baqa’ ftit ieħor. 4 ġimgħat oħra u nivvutaw.  Grazzi lil kulħadd tal-impenn. Għax il-messaġġ qiegħed jasal.

Il-miljuni ta’ Ninu minn fejn ġew?

Ninu Zammit                          dollars

Mela issa, kif qaltilna l-Malta Independent on Sunday nafu li fil-kont li kellu fl-Isvizzera Ninu kellu $3.2 miljuni mġemma’ fih.

Ninu għamel użu mill-amnestija skond l-iskema tar-reġistrazzjoni tal-investimenti tal-2014 biex irregolarizza l-posizzjoni tiegħu. Biex setgħet saret din ir-reġistrazzjoni tal-investiment ta’ $3.2 miljuni li Ninu kellu l-Isvizzera, il-Bank Ċentrali ta’ Malta u/jew l-aġenti tiegħu għamlu dik li tissejjaħ due diligence. Jiġifieri staqsew lil Ninu l-mistoqsijiet u talbuh ukoll provi permezz ta’ dokumenti biex jistabilixxu l-oriġini ta’ dawn il-fondi.

Fil-medja, Ninu qal li dawn l-investimenti oriġinaw minn dħul mhux dikjarat mill-professjoni tiegħu kif ukoll min-negozju ta’ artijiet. X’qal lill-Bank Ċentrali jew lill-aġenti tiegħu mhux magħruf għax l-informazzjoni li tkun inġabret ħadd ma għandu aċċess għaliha.

Il-mistoqsija li qed jistaqsi kulħadd hi dwar jekk il-Bank Ċentrali u/jew l-aġenti tiegħu staqsewx biżżejjed kif ukoll jekk għarblux lil Ninu biżżejjed biex jistabilixxu bla dubju minn fejn oriġinaw l-investimenti.

Kien għalhekk li l-bieraħ fi stqarrija għall-istampa, Alternattiva Demokratika, permezz ta’ Arnold Cassola, qalet li jkun għaqli li l-Awditur Ġenerali jinvestiga sewwa dak li għamel il-Bank Ċentrali u dan mhux biss fil-konfront ta’ Ninu Zammit imma ukoll fil-konfront ta’ kull minn għamel użu mill-iskema tar-reġistrazzjoni tal-investimenti fl-2014.

L-Awditur Ġenerali biss għandu l-awtorità li jagħmel dan. Meta l-Awditur Ġenerali jinvestiga, jkun jista’ jistabilixxi jekk l-investimenti mhux dikjarati ġewx verament minn dħul li dawk li applikaw għall-amnestija iddikjaraw. Inkella jekk kienx hemm dħul minn sorsi oħra, bħall korruzzjoni jew inkella ħasil ta’ flus ġejjin, per eżempju, min-negozju tad-droga.

Sakemm l-affarijiet jibqgħu sigrieta fil-Bank Ċentrali dejjem ser jibqa’ d-dubju dwar jekk il-Bank Ċentrali għafasx biżżejjed biex jassigura li l-informazzjoni li kellu kienitx dik korretta. Jekk issir il-verifika mill-uffiċċju tal-Awditur Ġenerali ikun hemm probabbilta’ ferm iktar li jkun stabilit jekk l-affarijiet sarux sewwa jew le.

The politics of Sustainable Development

four_pillar-sustainable  development

 

Sustainable Development is about how we satisfy our needs today in a responsible manner. We normally refer to the World Commission on Environment and Development headed by Gro Harlem Brundtland who, in her final report in 1987 entitled Our Common Future defined sustainable development as “the development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

The politics of sustainable development is hence about politics with a responsible long-term view: it is about the future that we desire to bequeath to future generations. It is a future that we can mould today as a result of the careful consideration of the impacts of each and every one of our present actions.

Sustainable Development is about living in harmony with all that surrounds us, at all times. It is about being in harmony with Mother Earth, with nature and with our fellow human beings. It is treating our surroundings as part of our family: it is the Brother Sun Sister Moon philosophy espoused by Francis of Assisi. It is the path to dignity aiming simultaneously at the eradication of poverty and the protection of the planet. Sustainable development requires the synchronisation of cultural, social, environmental and economic policy. Shielding human dignity, appreciating our culture and environmental protection are as essential as economic development.

There is a visible gap between the political declarations made and the implementation of sustainable development policies. The international community is analysing the achievements made through the Millennium Development Goals agreed to during the Johannesburg 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development. As a result, it is discussing the adoption of Sustainable Development Goals by the United Nations General Assembly next September. Yet in Malta we still lack an appropriate  sustainable development infrastructure.

So far, the Maltese political class has failed in integrating Sustainable Development policymaking and its implementation. Malta is not unique in this respect. In fact, even prior to the Rio+20 Summit in 2012, in his report entitled Objectives and Themes Of The United Nations Conference On Sustainable Development, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon discusses institution building at all levels ranging from the local to the international.

Ban Ki Moon had emphasised that on a national level the integration challenge has been responded to by the creation of new institutions (such as national councils), in many cases with disappointing results. Malta is one such case. The institutional framework for sustainable development in Malta has not been able to deliver so far.

The National Commission for Sustainable Development was disbanded years ago and the provisions of the National Strategy for Sustainable Development have been largely ignored. This strategy, which was the result of extensive consultations with civil society, laid down not only the objectives to be achieved but also the structures to be set up in each ministry in order to proceed with the strategy’s implementation.

All the deadlines laid down in the National Sustainable Development Strategy have been ignored by the government. This was primarily the responsibility of the previous government led by Lawrence Gonzi. The present government is apparently still in a trance about the whole matter.

The only positive development in the past years has been the adoption of a proposal of Alternattiva Demokratika -The Green Party in Malta, leading to the appointment of a Guardian for Future Generations. However, deprived of the substantial resources required to be effective, all the good intentions of the Guardian will not suffice to kick-start the implementation process. Even the minister responsible for sustainable development has some bark but no bite. He too has been deprived of the essential resources to carry out his mission. He has not inherited any functioning sustainable development infrastructure. In addition, he has been given political responsibility for the environment without in any way being directly involved in the environmental functions of MEPA. This is not an indictment of Minister Leo Brincat but rather an indictment of his boss, the Prime Minister, who is quite evidently not interested in beefing up the regulatory infrastructure. Waiting two years for some form of indication of goodwill is more than enough.

The National Sustainable Development Strategy has a whole section dealing with the implementation process. When approved by Cabinet on the eve of the 2008 general elections, it had laid down the need for “a permanent structure, appropriately staffed and funded (which) should be established to coordinate, monitor, revise and promote the National Strategy for Sustainable Development among all stakeholders. Such a structure should be placed under the direction of the National Commission for Sustainable Development” (section 4.1 of the National Strategy for Sustainable Development).

Seven years later this permanent structure is still inexistent. Is there need of any further proof of the lack of political will to act on sustainable development?

 

published on 8 March 2015 in The Malta Independent on Sunday

Tinsewx x’għamlu l-kaċċaturi. Inneħħulhom il-maskra.

Dak li għamlu l-kaċċaturi ħadd m’hu ser jinsieħ.

Il-filmat xukkanti ta’ 30 sekonda juri filmati tal-kaċċaturi jokkupaw b’arroganza l-kampanja, jisparaw fuq għasafar rari u protetti, u jattakkaw b’mod vjolenti u jabbużaw persuni innoċenti.

Il-kaċċaturi qed jinħbew wara maskra bil-kampanja tal-‘iva’, imma dan il-filmat jikxef dik il-maskra. Juri l-impatt reali u xokkanti tal-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa fil-kampanja, fuq l-għasafar u b’mod speċjali fuq kull min jazzarda jgawdi l-kampanja matul ir-rebbiegħa. Aħna ma nsejniex dawn l-inċidenti, u hu importanti li l-pubbliku ma jinsix dan meta jivvota fil-11 t’April.

SHout żvelaw ukoll l-ewwel poster tal-kampanja li juri l-atti ta’ vandaliżmu u l-qtil li jseħħ matul l-istaġuni tal-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa. Il-poster tal-kampanja jservi bħala tfakkira għalina lkoll tal-intolleranza, vandaliżmu u l-qtil li hu assoċjat mal-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa u għala l-vot tal-‘le’ huwa daqshekk importanti fir-referendum.

Il-kampanja wkoll ġabret rapport tal-iktar eżempji estremi ta’ vjolenza, vandaliżmu u qtil ta’ għasafar protetti matul l-aħħar għaxar snin. Ir-rapport juri erbatax-il inċident ta’ vjolenza sinifikanti fuq in-nies, sittax-il inċident ta’ vandaliżmu fuq is-siġar, riżervi naturali jew propjetà kif ukoll disa’ inċidenti serji ta’ theddid u abbużi kontra membri tal-pubbliku u voluntiera.

Din il-wirja ta’ attitudni vjolenti, vandaliżmu u theddid hi tassew xokkanti u sservi biex tfakkar x’ċertu sezzjonijiet tal-komunità tal-kaċċaturi huma kapaċi jagħmlu. Filwaqt li r-rapport għandu l-aktar eżempji estremi, ma nistgħux ninsew li membri tal-pubbliku ġenerali ta’ spiss huma suġġetti għal abbuż verbali u intimidazzjoni waqt l-istaġun tal-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa.

Il-filmat juri l-impatt ikrah tal-kaċċa fir-rebbiegħa fuq l-għasafar, waqt li juri li wħud mill-iktar inċidenti xokkanti tal-qtil illegali fis-snin riċenti. Ma ninsewx il-kuċċard rari li sfaw fil-mira matul il-lejl waqt li kienu qed jistrieħu: użaw it-torċijiet biex ikunu jistgħu jisparaw fuqhom. Ma nistgħux ninsew il-fjammingi, iċ-ċikonji u l-kaċċatur bil-balaklava li nqabad jispara fuq l-għasafar fis-santwarju tal-għasafar Foresta 2000.

Dawn l-inċidenti huma biss il-ftit li jidher minn barra u juri li għandna nivvutaw ‘le’ biex b’hekk l-għasafar ikunu jistgħu jtiru fuq Malta bla periklu fi triqithom lejn l-Ewropa biex ibidu l-bajda u jiżdiedu fin-numru.

The Circular Economy: by Karmenu Vella

Karmenu Vella.pensive

Speech by Commissioner Vella at the 2015 European Circular Economy Conference

Brussels, 05 March 2015

Karmenu Vella – Commissioner for Environment, Maritime Affairs and Fisheries 

Ministers,

Authorities,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for inviting me to speak at this conference.

Let me start with an ideal definition of Circular Economy;

In a circular economy, almost nothing is wasted. Re-use and remanufacturing is standard practice, and sustainability is built into the fabric of that society. There is less waste to deal with, and more is generated from limited resources. The new technologies created then bolster the competitive position on the world stage.

Our challenge is to place the European Union at the forefront of these developments.

Yesterday I was speaking at the launch of the State of the Environment Report. It says very clearly that the short-term trends related to resource efficiency are encouraging. That is thanks largely to good strategic thinking, and to good European policy. But success should breed vigilance not complacency.

The more I look at the two sides – the environment and the economy – the more convinced I become that the way forward is to fully integrate resource efficiency into the way we do business in Europe.

We know why a circular economy is a good idea. At the moment Europe is still locked into a linear production chain that is resource intensive. We obtain resources and then discard them as waste.

The full potential and value is lost. But in a world where the global population rises by more than 200 000 every day, with all the demand that places on land, water, food, feed, fibre, raw materials and energy, this is no longer sustainable.

By 2050 we would need three times more resources than we currently use. And the demand for food, feed and fibre will rise by 70 per cent. Yet more than half the ecosystems these resources depend on are already degraded, or are being used beyond their natural limits.

And ‘Ecosystem’ is perhaps the key word. We need our industrial system to behave much more like an eco-system. In an eco-system, the waste of one species is the resource to another. We need to recalibrate so that the output of one industry becomes automatically the input of another.

To address specifically the Commission’s circular economy package.

The Commission is aiming to present a new, more ambitious circular economy package late in 2015, to transform Europe into a more competitive resource-efficient economy, addressing a range of economic sectors in addition to waste.

But let us remember that the concept of the Circular Economy has been around since the 1960’s; first called the ‘spaceman’ economy, so called because everything on a spaceship has to be reused, then ‘cradle to cradle’, and now the Circular Economy. This is a long-term concept and we need a little time to get the long-term policy response right.

The decision to withdraw the waste legislative proposal was based on the need to better align it with the priorities of the new Commission. The Commission has decided to undertake a thorough reflection on how the objective of circular economy can be reached in a more efficient way that is fully compatible with the jobs and growth agenda.

Continuously advancing waste management remains a priority of course, through incentives and support for waste reduction as well as high-quality separation and collection systems. The latter ensure that resources stay within the circle and are available for future use.

Waste is not managed as well as it could be. In 2012 total waste production in the EU amounted to 2,5 billion tons, an average of 5 tons per inhabitant and per year. From this total only a limited share of 36% was effectively recycled. The largest share, 37%, was simply sent for disposal whether in landfills or on lands. In other words, around 1620 million tons of waste was lost for the EU economy. Losing this material means that significant growth and competitiveness potential is not being exploited through the development of a reuse/recycling industry in the EU.

Getting maximum value from resources requires action at all stages of the life cycle of products.

There needs to be circular economy processes reflected from the extraction of raw material to the product design, production and production of goods and through an increasing use of secondary raw-materials.

Products that last longer, have a longer warranty, or come with repair manuals and spare parts would help in this sense.

The distribution and consumption of goods must be part of that process.

To speak from the Maritime and Fisheries side of my portfolio;

Too much plastic waste, which could be recycled, and be a valuable resource, ends up as micro-plastics in our seas.

Repair and re-use schemes should be advanced.

And we should be capable of creating a genuine market for recyclates.

The Commission, when re-tabling the package, will include a new legislative proposal on waste targets, taking into account the input already given to us during public consultations, and by Council and in Parliament, in particular the comments made by many that the previous waste proposal needed to be more country-specific.

But let us remember one thing. The Circular Economy transformation on the scale we have in mind will never come about simply as a result of legislation. We need a combined approach, where smart regulation is blended with market-based instruments, innovation and incentives. These would provide businesses, including SMEs, with concrete tools and instruments and incentives to promote the transition to a circular economy.

We want to give a clearly positive signal to those waiting to invest in the circular economy. Above all the private sector needs regulatory certainty. Clarity promotes investment and investment promotes jobs. The job creation potential of the circular economy is not to be underestimated.

Despite the financial crisis, in the environmental goods and services sector, employment continued to increase during recent years, from 3 to 4.2 million jobs (2002-2011), with 20% growth in the recession years (2007- 2011). There is also an expanding global market for green industries, offering substantial export potential.

And that is the policy line we need to follow in the future. Recent estimates show how increasing resource productivity by 30 % by 2030 could boost GDP by nearly 1 %, while creating over two million jobs more than under a business as usual scenario. Waste prevention, eco-design, reuse and similar measures could bring net savings of € 600 billion, or 8 % of annual turnover, for businesses in the EU, while reducing total annual greenhouse gas emissions by 2-4 %.

The Commission will continue to promote eco-innovation and investment in clean technologies to build a circular economy. The preparatory report on the European Strategic Investment Plan highlights the importance of resource efficiency, identifying it as one of the key objectives. This should translate into firm support for eco-innovation projects, actively complementing the considerable support already available via the European Structural and Investment Funds.

The new approach is two-fold:

First, we will of course present a new legislative proposal on waste targets. This new proposal will use the expert knowledge already gained to be more country sensitive. I want to assure you that we will keep our EU wide goals on recycling levels

Our success will be measured by how well policies are implemented on the ground. So we will have to set smart, realistic objectives and focus on implementation.

Second, to close that circle, we will prepare a roadmap for further action on the circular economy. It will consider two aspects:

upstream: in the production and use phase, before products become waste; and

downstream: after products are no longer waste, looking at what can be done to encourage and develop a market for the recycled products.

The work on this half of the circle will take the form of a roadmap where we identify what can be done rapidly, and what we should propose at a later stage.

Both these aspects – the waste targets review and the roadmap – will come together before the end of this year. I hope you will agree with me that this is quite a broad and ambitious programme.

But we are not starting from scratch. Europe already has a wide range of rules and instruments contributing to a circular economy: for instance in the area of emissions, waste or chemicals. If a product contains hazardous substances, for instance, it cannot be recycled at high level of quality.

I remind you of the State of the Environment Report. From now to 2050 we must double our efforts to encourage resource efficiency. Europe remains a place where skill levels are sky high but where resources levels are rock bottom. Innovation and enterprise is Europe’s passport to a secure future.

We want to get Europe growing again. We will discuss the greening of the European Semester, and the EU’s resource efficiency agenda tomorrow, in Council, with Environment ministers. Pressures on resources and the environment are one of the four main factors that can hamper growth in the long-term. This much emerged from our review of the Europe 2020 strategy.

There are significant savings to be made with circular economy approaches.

The circular economy, can contribute further to the objectives of the Energy Union and the Climate Package.

It can have an immediate impact on the environment;

I am convinced that by turning into a truly recycling society we will not only serve the environment, but also ourselves.

So I count on you to bring the reflection forward. As I mentioned, we will consult widely before choosing the most appropriate tools.

Your input to this process will be very valuable and, as always, I am keen to listen to all views.

Thank you for your attention.

Jafu x’inhuma jagħmlu?

left and right

 

Dal-għodu l-Kunsill Lokali ta’ Birżebbuġa f’Konferenza Stampa spjega kif l-Awtorità tat-Trasport iddeċidiet illi fil-Bajja s-Sabiħa (Pretty Bay) jinbeda proġett għall-irmiġġi tad-dgħajjes. Ħafna movement ta’ dgħajjes ma jgħinx biex titjieb il-kwalita’ tal-ilma baħar b’mod li jkun tajjeb għall-għawm.

Fl-istess ħin l-Awtorità tat-Turiżmu kienet qed tikkoordina mal-Kunsill biex is-servizzi fil-Bajja jitjiebu u b’hekk ikun iktar possibli illi tingħata l-bandiera l-Blú (Blue Flag Status).

Verament każ tal-id ix-xellugija ma tafx x’inhi tagħmel l-id il-leminija!