Il-Gvern tal-Labour ABZ mill-ambjent

F’Jum l-Ambjent, il-Gvern ABZ mill-ambjent u mill-impatti ambjentali

Jum l-ambjent, din is- sena, għal darba oħra, ma jfissirx affarijiet sbieħ. Ġimgħa wara l-oħra ħlief aħbarijiet li huma ta’ ħsara ambjentali m’hawnx.

L-istorja tan-Nigret li, suppost tkompli għada, hi waħda minn tal-aħħar.  Art barra miż-żona tal-iżvilupp (ODZ) ingħatat għall-bini mill-Gvern tal-PN. Il-Labour fil-Gvern jista’ jżommha milli tinbena, imma ma għamel xejn u ma hu ser jagħmel xejn.

Il-bieraħ kellna lill-Ministru għall-Finanzi jgħidilna li bil-mudell ekonomiku tiegħu, f’Malta ser ikollna 800,000 ruħ sas-sena 2040. Meta ikkunsidrajt sur Clyde l-impatti ta’ dawn kollha fuq l-ambjent?

Ir-residenti tal-Belt huma irrabjati għax il-Belt Valletta qed tkun ittransformata f’ċentru ta’ divertiment, bi storjbu sotanzjali matul il-lejl.

Il-Gvern ma jimpurtaħx minn dan kollu. Għax filwaqt li għandna ħafna tejatrin għaddej dwar l-ambjent, fir-realtà il-Gvern tal-Labour hu ABZ mill-ambjent u mill-impatti ambjentali.

Nirrikunsidraw is-sussidji tal-enerġija, l-ilma u l-fuel

Bla ebda dubju hu l-każ li l-użu tal-enerġija u l-ilma jkun issussidjat f’dan il-mument ta’ kriżi. Dan is-sussidju għandu jkun immirat biex jindirizza l-impatti soċjali ta’ żieda fil-prezz tal-enerġija u l-ilma sakemm nibqgħu taħt l-effett tal-impatti tal-invażjoni tal-Ukrajina. M’għandniex nieħdu t-triq il-faċli li twassal għal abbuż minn fondi pubbliċi imferrxa fuq kulħadd.

Is-sussidji għandhom ikunu indirizzat lejn min għandu l-ħtieġa tagħhom. Xi ħtieġa hemm li tissussidja lil min għandu l-mezzi biex ikampa?

Il-konsum bażiku tal-enerġija u l-ilma fid-djar tagħna għandu definittivament jibqa’ protett bis-sussidji għaż-żmien li ġej. Din hi neċessità soċjali biex primarjament ikunu mħarsa l-vulnerabbli u dawk bi dħul baxx. Imma lil hinn mis-sussidji applikati għal dan il-konsum basiku ta’ enerġija u ilma ma hemm l-ebda raġuni biex dan is-sussidju jkun japplika għal konsum iktar minn dak bażiku. Min għandu l-mezzi li jwasslu għal konsum ikbar għandu jkollu ukoll ir-riżorsi biex jerfa’ l-ispiża addizzjonali tal-konsum tiegħu jew tagħha.

Ma hemm xejn ikkumplikat f’dak li qed ngħid. Huwa l-mod kif wara kollox diġa jinħadmu l-kontijiet għall-ilma li nikkunsmaw: il-konsum bażiku tal-ilma jitħallas b’rati sussidjati, filwaqt li konsum ikbar tal-ilma diġa jitħallas b’rati kummerċjali. M’għandu jkun hemm l-ebda diffikultà li dan jinftiehem: huwa l-mod kif il-kontijiet tal-ilma ilhom jinħadmu għal iktar minn tletin sena!

Dan kollu hu ukoll dibattibbli meta nikkunsidraw il-konsum ta’ ilma u l-enerġija meta dan il-konsum ma jsirx fir-residenzi. Hu raġjonevoli li napplikaw is-sussidji biex inħarsu l-impiegi. Jeħtieġ imma li s-sussidji jkunu iffukati. Ikun għaqli għalhekk li perjodikament neżaminaw mill-ġdid il-kif u l-kemm b’mod li dawn is-sussidji jkunu raġjonevoli u mhux iktar milli nifilħu bħala pajjiż.

Ma jagħmilx sens imma, li l-użu kollu tal-enerġija u l-ilma jkun issussidjat. Hu meħtieġ li r-riżorsi limitati li għandna nużawhom bir-reqqa.

Iżda l-kaz tas-sussidji għall-konsum tal-fuels, jiġifieri s-sussidji applikati għall-petrol u d-dijżil hi storja kompletament differenti. Il-Gvern diġa, wara ftit ġimgħat, biddel ftit il-proposta oriġinali tiegħu billi ma baqax jissussidja l-konsum tal-fuel (primarjament dijżil) fil-każ ta’ opri tal-baħar imdaqqsa.

Ma hemm l-ebda ħtieġa soċjali biex ikun issussidjat il-petrol u d-dijżil. In-numru żgħir ta’ każi fejn l-użu ta’ karozzi privati hu meħtieġ biex tkun indirizzata d-diżabilita konnessa mal-mobilità jistgħu faċilment ikollhom għajnuna iffukata għall-ħtiġijiet partikolari tagħhom.

It-tneħħija tas-sussidji fuq il-konsum tal-fuel ikun ifisser żieda sostanzjali fil-prezz tal-petrolu u d-dijżil. L-impatt ewlieni tat-tneħħija ta’ dan is-sussidju fuq jkun wieħed pożittiv għax iwassal għal tnaqqis immedjat ta’ karozzi mit-toroq tagħna. Dan iwassal ukoll għal titjib fil-kwalità tal-arja.

Tajjeb li uħud jiftakru li 50 fil-mija tal-vjaġġi li nagħmlu bil-karozzi privati fit-toroq tagħna huma vjaġġi għal distanzi qosra. Il-parti l-kbira ta’ dawn il-vjaġġi, bi prezz rejalistiku tal-petrol u d-dijżil ma jsirux u minflok jintuża t-trasport pubbliku jew forom oħra ta’ mobilità sostenibbli. It-trasport pubbliku kif nafu hu bla ħlas!

Il-partiti parlamentari presentement qed jargumentaw b’veduti dijametrikament opposti. Min-naħa l-waħda l-Labour irid jibqa’ b’sussidji fuq il-konsum kollu filwaqt li l-PN qed jargumenta favur li dawn is-sussidji jkunu eliminati. Dan il-kuntrast bejn il-PLPN  dwar iż-żamma jew it-tneħħija tas-sussidji iħawwad l-imħuħ. Neħtieġu nimxu bir-raġuni anke meta nitkellmu dwar is-sussidji f’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi.

Ir-riżorsi tagħna huma limitati. Irridu nużawhom bil-għaqal biex inkunu nistgħu nibqgħu ngħinu lill-vulnerabbli.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 30 t’April 2023

Revisiting energy, water and fuel subsidies

There is definitely a case to make in favour of subsidised energy and water use in this particular time of crisis. This should be aimed at mitigating the social impacts of an increase in energy and water rates for as long as the impacts of the Ukraine invasion remain. We should not, however, take the easier way out and splash public funds around indiscriminately. Subsidies should be focused on those who need them. Why subsidise those who can cope?

The basic energy and water consumption of residential households should definitely remain protected and subject to subsidies in the medium term. This is a social necessity in order, primarily to protect the vulnerable and low earners. However, beyond subsidies applied to basic and essential energy (and water) consumption, there are no valid reasons for the current across the board energy/water subsidies of residential households. Those who can afford to run large domestic properties should be able to shoulder the increased cost of the energy and water which they consume.

This is not rocket science. It is in fact the manner in which we are already billed for our water consumption: basic water consumption is billed at subsidised rates whilst beyond that, commercial rates apply. It should not be too difficult to understand: it is how our water bills have been computed for the past thirty years or so!

The matter is also debatable when considering non- residential energy and water consumption. When protecting existing employment, in the short to medium term, subsidies to energy and water rates are reasonable. Beyond that, however one needs to be more focused and revisit the workings to determine whether and the extent to which such subsidies may be reasonable and affordable to the national exchequer.

Blanket long-term energy and water subsidies for non-residential use are not on. We must be capable of living within our limited means.

The case of subsidies applied to fuel consumption, that is to say subsidies applied to petrol and diesel use is completely different. Government has already after a few weeks tweaked its original decision and removed the applicability of subsidies when applied to fuel consumption (primarily diesel) in the case of large boats.

There is generally no social need to subsidise petrol and diesel. The small number of cases where private vehicle use is required to address issues of disability can be addressed directly by introducing adequate focused help.

Removal of fuel subsidies would signify a substantial increase in the price of petrol and diesel. The primary impact of the removal of subsidies applied to petrol and diesel would be beneficial as it would signify an immediate reduction of cars from our roads and a consequent immediate improvement in air quality.

Some may need to be reminded that 50 per cent of private car trips on our roads is for the travelling of short distances. Most of these trips could, as a result of a realistic price of fuel, be shifted to public transport or other alternative modes of sustainable mobility.  As we know public transport is free of charge.

The Parliamentary parties are at present arguing on two diametrically opposed views. On one hand Labour is emphasising the need of complete subsidisation while the PN is in favour of the complete removal of these subsidies. The contrasting views on the retention of subsidies or their negation, advocated by PLPN, are not at all helpful. We need reasonableness even when considering the application of subsidies in such situations.

Our resources are limited. We must use them judiciously in order to be able to continue helping the vulnerable.

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday : 30 April 2023

Il-ONE (illum) jiċċensura lil Alfred Sant

Dal-għodu Alfred Sant indirizza l-konferenza ġenerali tal-Partit Laburista. Fl-aħbarijiet tal-lejla tal-ONE ma smajt xejn dwar x’qal. Meta fittixt skoprejt għaliex.

Il-Times online dalghodu irrapporta dak li qal Alfred Sant: tkellem dwar il-korruzzjoni, dwar l-abbuż li qed isir minn kumpaniji multinazzjonali mis-sistema tat-tassazzjoni Maltija biex jevutaw it-taxxi f’pajjiżhom u dwar l-impatti tat-tibdil fil-klima.

Korruzzjoni? Ma tarax! Aqta’!

Meta nara li l-ONE ma jiddejqux jiċċensura anke lil Alfred Sant, xejn ma niskanta li jagħmlu ħilithom biex jippruvaw jiċċensuraw lilna tal-ADPD ukoll.

ONE: ġurnaliżmu tal-ħabbagozz!

It-turiżmu u l-bidla fil-klima

In-natura ma tinvolvix ruħha f’negozjati dwar l-impatti tagħha. Fil-mument addattat tisplodi, bla ma tiddiskrimina: fejn laqat laqat. Dan jidher ċar b’mod regolari ma’ kull maltempata qalila jew kalamità naturali f’kull parti tad-dinja.

It-tibdil fil-klima hu bħall-bomba tal-ħin li tista’ tieħu minn minuta għall-oħra.  Qagħda li qed teħżien ma’ kull rapport xjentifiku li jkun ippubbblikat. F’Marzu ħareġ rapport ieħor tal-IPCC li għal darb’oħra wissa li ma baqax wisq ħin biex nieħdu passi. Is-sinjali huma ċari, għal min irid jarahom. Fil-prattika, iżda, dawn huma injorati, forsi sakemm joħroġ rapport ieħor inkella sakemm issir xi laqgħa oħra internazzjonali. Isiru ħafna wegħdiet li l-affarijiet ser jinbidlu, li l-imġieba ser taqleb għall-aħjar: imma wara ftit kważi kulħadd jinsihom. Dan hu ċiklu li jirrepeti ruħu kull tant żmien.

Ma hemmx għalfejn immorru lura ħafna fiż-żmien. Ħarsu biss lejn it-temp lokali tul ix-xahar ta’ Frar 2023. Il-maltempata Helios laqtet il-gżejjer Maltin nhar id-9 ta’ Frar 2023: tul 24 siegħa x-xita li niżlet qabżet id-doppju tal-medja għax-xahar ta’ Frar. Il-ħsara li saret ma kienitx żgħira.

Minkejja dan, f’Malta għad hawn min joħlom li aħna, għandna nkunu eżentati mill-azzjoni radikali meħtieġa biex tkun indirizzata l-bidla fil-klima. Il-Membru Parlamentari Ewropew Laburista Cyrus Engerer, per eżempju, il-ġimgħa l-oħra ġie rappurtat li kien irrabjat għall-Kummissjoni Ewropeja għax il-proposti tagħha dwar il-bidla fil-klima huma l-istess għal kulħadd (one size fits all). Qal li l-istati gżejjer għandhom ikunu eżentati mill-liġijiet dwar il-bidla fil-klima. Dak li qal Engerer kien b’referenza għad-Direttiva dwar it-Tassazzjoni fuq l-Enerġija li hi immirata biex jonqsu l-emmissjonijiet tal-karbonju partikolarment billi jkunu ndirizzati l-impatti ambjentali tal-industrija tal-avjazzjoni.

Ilkoll nafu li t-turiżmu minn u lejn Malta hu dipendenti fuq l-industrija tal-avjazzjoni. Imma flok ma fittixna, tul is-snin,  li nżommu lit-turiżmu taħt kontroll b’politika li tagħti kaz l-impatti tal-industrija fuq il-klima, il-boloh li qed imexxu l-Awtorità Maltija tat-Turiżmu qed jimmiraw li jilħqu l-mira ta’ 3 miljun turist fis-sena.

Hemm ukoll studju ikkummissjonata mill-Assoċjazzjoni Maltija tal-Lukandi (MHRA) liema studju jikkwantifika kemm hawn sodod għat-turisti, mhux biss dawk li jeżistu, imma ukoll dawk approvati mill-permessi li diġà ħargu. Dan ir-rapport (tourism carrying capacity report) jgħid li hawn biżżejjed sodod li biex nużawhom neħtieġu li jkollna viċin il-5 miljun turist fis-sena.

Il-politika Maltija tat-turiżmu tfasslet qiesu għada ma hu ser jasal qatt. Riżultat ta’ hekk impatti ambjentali negattivi jibqgħu jinġemgħu minn proġetti massiċċi diġa mfassla, bħal dak ta’ Villa Rosa, mifrux fuq madwar 48,000 metru kwadru tul il-kosta tal-Bajja ta’ San Ġorg.

Biex tkompli tgħaxxaqha l-istudju tal-impatti ambjentali għall-proġett ta’ Villa Rosa hu mibni madwar analiżi ekonomika li tikkonkludi li l-proġett hu wieħed ekonomikament vijabbli.

L-industrija tal-avjazzjoni ilha żmien mhux ħażin teħlisha u tevita li ġġorr il-konsegwenzi tal-impatti tagħha: ilha eżentata milli terfa’ l-piż tal-emissjonijiet tal-karbonju li tiġġenera.  Dan kollu, iżda, jidher li qed joqrob lejn it-tmiem għax anke l-industrija tal-avjazzjoni ser ikollha iddur dawra sewwa madwarha u tibda hi ukoll terfa’ r-responsabbiltà għall-impatti tagħha. Il-prinċipju li min iħammeġ irid iħallas għandu japplika għall-industrija tal-avjazzjoni u bħala konsegwenza għat-turiżmu ukoll.  Bħal kull settur ekonomiku, dan is-settur irid jagħti kaz u jibda jerfa’ l-piz tal-impatti ambjentali tiegħu stess.

Bla dubju mhux ser tkun faċli. Dan hu inevitabbli, anke minħabba li għal żmien twil ftit li xejn tajna kaz, anzi evitajna kemm stajna din ir-realtà.

Xi snin ilu, f’Ottubru 2019, il-Parlament Malti approva mozzjoni dwar l-emerġenza klimatika. Imma sfortunatament, minkejja li din il-mozzjoni kienet approvata unanimament, xorta mhiex riflessa fil-politika tal-Gvern.

Hu fl-interess ta’ Malta li l-impatti ambjentali tat-turiżmu, b’mod partikolari t-turiżmu tal-massa, jkunu indirizzati bis-serjetà, qabel ma jkun tard wisq. L-industrija tal-avjazzjoni teħtieġ li tkun issensitizzata b’miżuri ekonomiċi bħat-taxxi ambjentali biex tibda tirriforma ruħha.  Irridu nżommu quddiem għajnejna, li l-gżejjer Maltin, bħall-gżejjer kollha,  jkunu minn tal-ewwel li jintlaqtu meta jseħħu uħud mill-agħar konsegwenzi tal-bidla fil-klima: l-għoli fil-livell tal-baħar.

It-turiżmu m’għandux ċans li jeħlisha. In-natura mhux ser tiġiha ħniena miċ-ċirkustanzi partikolari tagħna. Tiġi taqa’ u tqum mill-konsegwenzi ekonomiċi. Tibqa’ għaddejja minn fuqna u tkaxkar kollox, kif tagħmel kullimkien!

ippubblikat fuq Illum : 9 t’April 2023

Tourism and climate change

Nature does not negotiate as to its impacts. At the appropriate natural time, pun intended, it unleashes its fury on all, without discrimination. This is illustrated on a regular basis with every major storm or natural calamity around the globe.

Climate change is like a ticking time bomb. It gets worse with every scientific report published. In March, yet another IPCC report sounded the warning that we are living on borrowed time. The signs are there staring us in the face. In practice they are ignored until another report is published and maybe another Climate Summit is held. Many promises relative to behavioural change are made, most being ignored. This cycle has been repeated every so often.

We need not go back many years. Just consider the local weather during the month of February 2023. The storm Helios hit the Maltese islands on 9 February 2023: in just 24 hours the recorded precipitation was more than double the monthly average for the month of February. The damage caused was considerable.

Yet some still dream that we, in Malta, should be exempted from the far-reaching radical action needed to tackle climate change. Labour MEP Cyrus Engerer, for example, was reported last week as feeling angered at the EU Commission “one size fits all” approach on climate action. He stated that island states should be exempted from climate change legislation. Engerer’s outburst was a reference to the Energy Taxation Directive which aims at reducing carbon emissions in particular through addressing the environmental impacts of aviation.

We all know that tourism to and from Malta is dependent on the aviation industry. Yet, instead of seeking ways to re-dimension it, thereby factoring-in climate change impacts into tourism policy, the nitwits at the Malta Tourism Authority have currently embarked on achieving targets to increase tourism to Malta to the 3 million mark.

Furthermore, a study on Malta’s tourism carrying capacity commissioned by the MHRA and carried out by Deloitte some months ago had identified that we would need close to 5 million tourists per year to make adequate use of the tourism beds available, both those existent as well as those in the pipeline, already approved for development!

Malta’s tourism policy targets have been planned as if there is no tomorrow. This keeps piling up the negative environmental impacts from large scale development projects in the pipeline, such as the Villa Rosa project spread over close to 48,000 square metres along the St George’s Bay coast.

To add insult to injury the Environmental Impact Assessment for the Villa Rosa project is buttressed by an economic analysis which endorses its economic viability.

Aviation has been a free rider for quite some time, being exempted from shouldering the impacts of the carbon emissions which it generates. The holiday will soon be over and as a direct result the aviation industry must take stock of the situation and shoulder the responsibility for its impacts. The polluter pays principle applies to the aviation industry and as a result to the tourism industry too. Like all other economic sectors, it must factor in its costings the environmental impacts which it generates: in technical jargon internalisation of environmental costs.

It will undoubtedly be painful. This is inevitable as it has been deliberately avoided for so long.

Some years back, in October 2019, Parliament in Malta approved a motion on the climate emergency. Unfortunately, the unanimously approved motion is not reflected in government policy since.

It is in Malta’s interest that the environmental impacts of tourism, particularly mass tourism, are contained before it is too late. The aviation industry must be prodded through economic means, such as environmental taxation, to restructure itself. Let us all remember that like all islands, the Maltese islands, will be among the first to suffer some of the worst repercussions of climate change: the increase in sea level.

Tourism will not be spared. Nature and natural forces will not consider our special situation or our economic considerations: it will roll over us as it did elsewhere!

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 9 April 2023

Il-kosta (u madwarha) tagħna lkoll

Il-pubblikazzjoni riċenti tar-rapport dwar l-impatti ambjentali (EIA)  tal-proġett ta’   Villa Roża fil-Bajja ta San Ġorġ San Ġiljan ser terġa’ tiftaħ beraħ id-dibattitu dwar il-proġett tal-grupp dB f’Pembroke kif ukoll dwar il-Masterplan ta’ Paceville li kien abbandunat madwar sitt snin ilu, riżultat ta’ dibattitu intensiv li fih kienet involuta attivament is-soċjetà ċivili.

Għal darb’oħra il-proposta ċentrali ta’ żvilupp hi l-kummerċjalizzazzjoni intensiva tal-kosta kif ukoll madwarha, u dan apparti l-impatti konsiderevoli fuq iz-zona kollha.

Il-proposta tikkonċerna medda kbira ta’ 47,572 metri kwadri bi żvilupp propost li jikkonċerna t-turiżmu, id-divertiment flimkien ma’ użu kummerċjali, primarjament  uffiċini. Dan hu propost li jsir f’żona li diġa hi iffullata, prattikament is-sena kollha.

Ir-rapport dwar l-impatti ambjentali fih numru ta’ studji dwar diversi aspetti ta’ relevanza għall-proġett propost. Wieħed minn dawn hu analiżi ekonomika mħejji minn E-Cubed Consultants. Kif mistenni, dan l-istudju jitkellem f’termini pożittivi ħafna tal-proġett. Studji ta’ din ix-xorta li kapaċi jiġġustifikaw kollox, issa drajnihom!  Dan l-istudju jinjora kompletament  l-impatti li l-proġett ta’ Villa Roża ser ikollu fuq l-infrastruttura pubblika. Dawn l-impatti huma spiża li jridu jagħmlu tajjeb għalihom il-fondi pubbliċi. L-impatti tal-proġett innifsu huma sostanzjali. Imma meta tarahom b’mod kumulattiv ma’ dawk iġġenerati minn proġetti oħra kbar ippjanati għaż-żona huma enormi.

Dan hu kaz ieħor fejn il-profitti jmorru fil-but tas-settur privat imma hu mistenni li l-kaxxa ta’ Malta terfa’ l-ispejjes għall-iżvilupp meħtieġ tal-infrastruttura biex huma jkunu jistgħu jinqdew. Dwar dan, l-istudju ta’ E-Cubed hu sieket.

Dan x’mudell hu? Kif ġie indikat b’mod ċar minn studju ta’ Deloitte dwar it-turiżmu f’Malta, studju li kien ikkummissjonat mill-Assoċjazzjoni tal-Lukandi (MHRA), ser inkunu neħtieġu 4.7 miljun turist fis-sena biex jintużaw is-sodod li diġa hawn inkella li huma ippjanati! Dan ġenn, għax il-pajjiż ma jiflaħx għall-piż iġġenerat fuq l-infrastruttura kemm-il darba in-numru ta’ turisti li jżuruna jirdoppja.

Anke l-Gvern ħabbar mira ta’ tlett miljun turist, mira li hi għolja ħafna. Kieku l-Awtorità tat-Turiżmu għandha nitfa serjetà fit-tmexxija tagħha kienet tieħu passi biex trażżan l-iżvilupp sfrenat li għaddej fl-industrija u li fl-aħħar ħsara biss jagħmel. Ir-rebgħa imma m’għandiex limitu u qed twassal għal ħsara kbira għall-pajjiż.

Il-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-kosta u taz-zona madwarha teħtieġ li tieqaf qabel li din tibla l-ftit spazji miftuħa li għad baqa’ madwar l-istess kosta.

Permezz ta’ emendi li kienu saru għall-Kodiċi Ċivili f’dik li hi magħrufa bħala l-liġi tad-dimanju pubbliku l-Parlament kien approva leġislazzjoni biex jipproteġi l-kosta u bħala riżultat ta’ hekk iżid l-aċċess għall-pubbliku. Dan kien kollu daħq fil-wiċċ għax fil-prattika ma sar xejn. Kieku din il-leġislazzjoni qed taħdem, proġetti bħal dan ta’ Villa Roża ma jsirux għax dawn imorru kontra kemm il-kelma kif ukoll l-ispirtu tal-liġi.

Għaddej sforz kontinwu biex il-kosta tkun ikkumerċjalizzata.  Xi żmien ilu kellna l-proposta għall-marina ta’ Marsaskala. Kellna ukoll il-proposti dwar Manoel Island, dwar il-Bajja tal-Balluta, il-Waterfront tal-Birgu (inkluż il-marina) u l-marina għall-jottijiet fil-Kalkara u dan flimkien ukoll mal-Waterfront tal-Belt Valletta.

Ma dan wieħed irid iżid il-kummerċjalizzazzjoni sfrenata li għaddejja tal-ispazji pubbliċi mal-kosta, inkluż il-bankini.

L-art pubblika qed tkun kontinwament ittrasformata fi profitti għas-settur privat, ħafna drabi għal ftit magħżulin. Fi prattikament il-każi kollha, ħadd ma jagħti kaz tal-kwalità tal-ħajja tar-residenti. Dawn qed ikun kompletament injorati. Xi drabi r-residenti saħansitra jinbeżqu l-barra miz-zoni residenzjali.

Issa għaddew madwar erba’ snin minn meta l-Parlament approva l-leġislazzjioni biex iħares il-kosta. Biex din il-liġi tkun tista’ titwettaq  l-għaqdiet ambjentali ppreżentaw dokumentazzjoni dwar iktar minn għoxrin sit mal-kosta li jimmeritaw li jkunu mħarsa. Ninsab infurmat li dawn l-għaqdiet ambjentali ippreżentaw ukoll riċerka estensiva dwar min jippossjedi din l-art. Hi ta’ sfortuna li t-tkaxkir tas-saqajn tal-Awtorità tal-Artijiet u tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar qed iżżomm u tostakola l-ħidma meħtieġa biex din il-liġi li tipproteġi l-kosta titwettaq. Dan qed isir ukoll fejn ma hemm l-ebda dubju li l-art  hi propjetà pubblika.

Għalfejn isiru dawn il-liġijiet jekk ma hemm l-ebda intenzjoni biex dawn ikunu implimentati?

Jeħtieġ li niċċaqalqu jekk irridu nkunu f’posizzjoni li nħarsu dak li fadal mill-kosta u z-zoni ta’ madwarha, u dan qabel ma jkun tard wisq. Sfortunatament ma hemmx rieda politika dwar dan. Il-Gvern u l-awtoritajiet tiegħu iqiesu l-kosta u z-zona kostali bħala magna biex tagħmel il-flus. Din hi l-viżjoni li qed isegwu fi sħubija kontinwa mal-forzi spekulattivi.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 26 ta’Marzu 2023

The coast and coastal areas belong to all of us

The recent publication of the EIA for what is commonly referred to as the Villa Rosa project at St George’s Bay St Julians brings us back to the dB Pembroke project debate as well as the Paceville Masterplan aborted some six years ago as a result of an intensive debate which involved heavily civil society.

Once more the issue is a development proposal which seeks further intensive commercialisation of the coast and the coastal area. In addition, the impacts on the surroundings are substantial,

The proposal involves a massive 47,572 square metres footprint with a proposed development mix of tourism, leisure and business uses in an area which is already saturated and as a result overcrowded at practically all times of the year.

The EIA contains a number of studies relative to a multitude of aspects. One of these studies is an economic analysis by E-Cubed Consultants. As expected, this study gives a glowing economic endorsement of the project. We have become used to such studies which seem to be able to justify anything. In arriving at its conclusions this study, completely ignores the impacts which the Villa Rosa project will have on the public infrastructure and on the fact that this will have to be made good for by the public coffers. The impacts are substantial when the project is viewed on its own but they assume enormous proportions when viewed cumulatively with the impacts generated by other major projects already in hand or in the pipeline for the area.

This is another case of profits being channelled to the private sector with the public purse being expected to foot the bill for the infrastructural development required. E-Cubed are completely silent on the matter.

Is this the tourism model for the future? As clearly indicated by the Deloitte study on the tourism carrying capacity in the Maltese islands, commissioned by MHRA, at the end of the day we would require 4.7 million tourists per annum if existing and projected tourism projects are to have around an 80 per cent occupancy. This is pure madness: it would signify a more than doubling of the current number of  tourist arrivals.

Even the government stated target of 3 million tourists per annum is too high. If the Malta Tourism Authority (MTA) was anything close to serious it would have by now have taken urgent action to curtail the unrestrained development spree of these speculative developers. Their greed has no limits. It is driving this country towards a complete ruin.

The commercialisation of the coast and coastal areas has to stop before it engulfs the few open spaces left undeveloped in the vicinity of the coast.

Through amendments to the Civil Code in what is known as the Public Domain Act Parliament has approved legislation to protect the coast and to increase access to the public as a result. This legislative action unfortunately has so far proven to be another gimmick. If it were to be in any way effective this legislation would have nipped in the bud the proposed Villa Rosa development as it goes against both the letter and the spirit of this legislation.

A continuous effort to commercialise the coast is under way. It has been going on for quite some time. Some time back we had the proposal for a Marsaskala yacht marina. Some other glaring examples which come to mind are the case of  Manoel Island, Balluta Bay, the Birgu Waterfront and yacht marina, the Kalkara yacht marina, Valletta Waterfront.

There is also the ongoing commercialisation of the public spaces adjacent to the coast, including pavements and open spaces.

Public land is continuously being transformed into private profits, many times for the chosen few. In practically all cases, the quality of life of residents is not factored in, until the eleventh hour. Whenever possible, it is either avoided completely or else the residents are slowly squeezed out of residential areas.

It has been around four years since parliament approved legislation in order to reinforce the protection of the coastline through the public domain legislation. Environmental NGOs have submitted a list of over twenty sites along the coast which qualify for protection. I am informed that eNGOs have even carried out extensive research on ownership issues related to these sites. It is indeed unfortunate that the Lands Authority and the Planning Authority have ground the whole process to an unacceptable halt as a result rendering legislation ineffective. This applies even in those instances where it is proven beyond any doubt whatsoever that the land in question is public property.

Why approve such laws when there is no intention to implement them?

We need to act to protect what is left of the coast and the coastal areas, before it is too late. Unfortunately, there is no political will to act. Government and its authorities consider the coast and the coastal areas as money spinners. A vision which they pursue relentlessly in bed with the speculators.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 26 March 2023

Licensing the construction industry

Watching the collapse of the structure which killed Jean-Paul Sofia sends shock waves through every bit of my body each time I catch a split-second glimpse of the relative video.

The magisterial inquiry is under way but for some inexplicable reason there is a resistance to a much wider public inquiry. Faced with the resulting death and multiple injuries, the public inquiry is an essential tool which could make it possible to understand what actually happened, beyond the accident itself. The public inquiry could definitely unravel important information on a number of specifics which had a bearing on the accident even if at first glance these are possibly unconnected.

So far no one has been charged. It is not known whether anybody has been interrogated on the incident, except, probably, as part of the magisterial inquiry itself, which is unfortunately taking too long to conclude. It is possible that there are valid reasons for this delay, but we are not aware of these as the magistrate in charge of the inquiry does not normally go around explaining such matters. I believe that it is in the public interest for the Court Registrar to explain matters as we have a right to know, just as much as the Law Courts have a duty to explain.

It has been stated that the licensing of the construction industry will lead to its improvement. This, we are told, would ensure the development of an industry that respects rules and ensures their uniform enforcement, as a result being more protective of life and limb.

I do not think that anyone desires otherwise. However, the proposals in the draft licence regulations do not necessarily lead in that direction. They need much more than fine-tuning.

The proposed regulations list the qualifications and documentation which an applicant for one of the three types of construction licence (demolition, excavation/piling, construction) should comply with. One of these documents is the conduct certificate. The proposed regulations, however, do not clearly spell out whether, and the extent to which, the contents of such a conduct certificate should have a bearing on the adjudication process leading to a decision on the issuing or the withholding of a licence.

Specifically, being bankrupt is a licence disqualification which is clearly spelt out in the proposed regulations. Which conduct or behaviour will be considered as disqualifying an applicant for a licence or its renewal?  Zero tolerance of unacceptable behaviour should be clearly spelt out as grounds for disqualification. We do not need to wait for the ultimate consequences to disqualify an applicant or a licence holder. Acting in a timely manner, before it is too late, should be the objective of the licencing and regulatory process. This should be as clearly spelt out as bankruptcy in the proposed regulations! Being assumed, implied or discretionary is not sufficient.

How about those who have a history of enforcement issues with the Building Construction Authority (BCA)? Should such a history have a bearing on the issuing of a licence or its renewal?  Where do we draw the line? Considering the recorded behaviour of all applicants should definitely be the starting point of the licencing process. Applicants should not be considered as having a clean slate: all their existing baggage should have a direct bearing in the consideration of whether they should be licenced or not. Past behaviour is definitely a guarantee of future patterns of behaviour. If the past is ignored it is bound to be repeated. All this is unfortunately ignored by the draft regulations.

Specifically, the impacts of the whole process of construction on third parties needs to be given considerable importance even as a licencing requirement. Too many building contractors run roughshod over the concerns of neighbouring residents. This is not always satisfactorily addressed by the operators, at times leading to lengthy litigation. This is an area which, with proper enforcement, the licensing process should eventually improve substantially.

Case-law indicates that both the imposition of substantial administrative fines as well as the suspension or withdrawal of licences can be challenged on constitutional grounds. The long-drawn-out legal battles which will inevitably develop will render the regulatory process ineffective and as a result undermining the whole reform.

Likewise, there is serious potential for abuse. Administrative action may be used to intentionally eliminate the possibility for criminal action. The matter has already arisen in an environmental case where criminal action already initiated could not proceed due to the matter having been addressed through the payment of an administrative fine.

Furthermore, the Building and Construction Tribunal which would eventually consider appeals concerning licences, although described as independent and impartial, is nothing of the sort.  It is made up of part-timers who are in full-time private practice which includes advising operators in the building construction industry. This creates legal grounds for the contestation of all its decisions.

The effectiveness of the licencing process will, at the end of the day be dependent on the resources made available to the Building and Construction Authority in order that it can fulfil its regulatory responsibilities. The Authority must be proactive. It can only do this if its inspectors do not await the lodging of a report in order to take action.

Government’s declared willingness to act, regulate and enforce is positive. Only time will however show if this willingness is translated into concrete results. Signs so far are however not promising.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 19 March 2023

Il-legat ta’ Arvid Pardo: niskopru mill-ġdid il-vokazzjoni marittima

“Aħna għandna interess naturali u vitali fil-baħar ta’ madwarna li permezz tiegħu ngħixu u nieħdu n-nifs.” Dan hu kliem Arvid Pardo, dakinnhar ambaxxatur ta’ Malta għall-Ġnus Magħquda, kliem li qal meta kien qed jindirizza  l-Assemblea Ġenerali fuq il-proposta ta’ Malta dwar qiegħ il-baħar u r-rizorsi tiegħu bħala l-wirt komuni tal-umanità.

Il-baħar hu ħajjitna, iżda ftit li xejn jingħata prominenza fil-prijoritajiet politiċi tal-pajjiż. Bħala gżira stat,   il-baħar u dak kollu marbut miegħu, għandu jkun fuq nett fl-aġenda politika tal-pajjiż.  Hu ghalhekk ta’ tħassib li lokalment ma ntqal prattikament xejn mill-Gvern dwar trattat fuq l-ibħra internazzjonali konkluż iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa fil-qafas tal-istrutturi tal-Ġuns Magħquda. Ftehim li hu ta’ importanza storika u riżultat ta’ negozjati li ilhom sejrin sa mill-2004.  Dan hu ftehim li hu mibni fuq il-legat tal-Konvenzjoni tal-Ġnus Magħquda dwar il-Baħar li dwarha, permezz ta’ Arvid Pardo, Malta tat sehem kruċjali.

Malta teħtieġ li tiskopri mill-ġdid il-vokazzjoni marittima tagħha u li tkun fuq quddiem nett f’dawn l-inizjattivi fid-dibattitu marittimu internazzjonali. Biex inkunu proattivi jeħtieġilna li jkollna Ministeru iffukat fuq il-politika Marittima li jiġbor taħt saqaf wieħed il-politika marittima kollha ta’ relevanza għall-gżejjer Maltin: mill-ekonomija l-blu, is-sajd u l-akwakultura għall-ħarsien ta’ zoni marittimi estensivi anke fl-ibħra internazzjinali, il-ħarsien aħjar tal-kosta kif ukoll li nimplimentaw sewwa l-liġi dwar id-Dimanju Pubbliku bla dewmien u dan biex ikun assigurat l-aċċess pubbliku għall-kosta, u b’hekk, fuq perjodu ta’ żmien tkun ikkontrollata l-kummerċjalizzazzjoni tal-kosta li ilha sejra s-snin.

Darba kellna Segretarjat Parlamentari għall-Affarijiet Marittimi. Illum il-ġurnata l-politika marittima hi linja waħda fil-lista ta’ responsabbiltajiet tal-Kabinett taħt il-Ministeru tat-Trasport. Fir-realtà, imma, l-politika marittima hi frammentata  u dwarha hemm responsabbiltajiet f’diversi Ministeri.  Fil-prattika dan ifisser li ma hemm ħadd li għandu responsabbiltà politika diretta u konsegwenza ta’ hekk il-koordinazzjoni politika f’dan il-qasam hi waħda limitat ħafna.  Din hi ħasra għax dan hu qasam li għandu ħafna potenzjal li jkun ta’ ġid għall-pajjiż.

It-trattat il-ġdid ser ifittex li jindirizza l-ħarsien tas-saħħa tal-oċejani mhux biss fil-present, imma iktar importanti fuq medda ta’ żmien: dan hu il-wirt li ser inħallu warajna lill-ġenerazzjonijiet futuri.   Kif ġie emfasizzat mill-kelliemi għas-Segretarju Ġenerali tal-Ġnus Magħquda Antonio Guterres, dan it-trattat il-ġdid ser ifittex li jindirizza il-kriżi li qed tiffaċċja id-dinja fuq tlett fronti: it-tibdil fil-klima, it-telfien tal-bijodiversità u t-tniġġiż.

In-negozjati dwar it-trattat intemmu fil-lejl bejn l-4 u l-5 ta’ Marzu. Ser iservi biex titwettaq il-wegħda miftehma fil-konklużjonijiet  tal-Konferenza dwar il-Bijodiversità li saret f’Montreal f’Diċembru li għadda u li hi magħrufa bħala  30×30.   Din hi wegħda bl-iskop li tistabilixi fuq sisien legal sodi il-mira ta’ protezzjoni ta’ terz tal-bijodiversità fuq l-art u l-baħar u dan sas-sena 2030. In-negozjati dwar it-trattat fasslu l-qafas legali meħtieġ biex tkun tista’ tibda t-triq twila ħalli jkunu implimentati l-wegħdiet, il-konklużjonijiet u inizjattivi ta’ Montreal.

L-ibħra internazzjonali jibdew fejn jispiċċaw iż-żoni ekonomiċi esklussivi tal-pajjiżi differenti, ġeneralment madwar 200 mil nawtiku (390 km) mill-kosta. Dawn l-ibħra jammontaw għal 60 fil-mija tal-oċejani globali u ma huma tal-ebda pajjiż, u allura huma ta’ kulħadd! Dawn l-ibħra huma taħt theddida kontinwa ta’ ħsara mill-ħidma akkumulata tal-bniedem tul is-snin. Għalhekk il-ħtieġa li l-komunità internazzjonali taġixxi illum qabel għada.

Meta it-trattat jidħol fis-seħħ, forsi, inkunu pass eqreb lejn il-ħolqien ta’ zoni ta’ protezzjoni marittima fl-ibħra internazzjonali. Din, meta isseħħ tkun kisba storika kbira.

Arvid Pardo jkun kburi li wasalna sa hawn. L-aħjar mod kif nikkommemorawh ikun kull darba li nkunu kapaċi nidħlu għar-responsabbiltajiet internazzjonali tagħna dwar l-ibħra. Jeħtieġilna li niftakru kontinwament li bħala gżira, il-baħar hu ħajjitna: il-baħar hu dak li għamilna dak li aħna illum.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 13 ta’ Marzu 2023