A financial surplus, yet an environmental deficit

As was expected, last Monday’s budget speech solemnly announced a budget surplus for the first time in many years. However, the environmental deficit was, as usual, hidden between the lines.

The budget is aptly titled Preparing for the Future (Inlestu għall-Futur). In dealing with environmental issues, the budget speech does not lay down clearly the path the government will be following. At times, it postpones matters – proposing studies and consultations on subjects that have been in the public domain for ages.

On the subject of vacant properties, the government prefers the carrot to the stick. In order to get dilapidated and empty properties in village centres back on the rental market, it is offering a €25,000 grant to renovate such properties, but then rightly insists that, once renovated these should be made available for social housing for a minimum of 10 years. In previous budgets, various other fiscal incentives have been offered to encourage such properties being placed back on the market.

After offering so many carrots, it would also make sense to use the stick by way of taxing vacant properties in situations where the owner is continuously ignoring the signals sent regarding the social, economic and environmental impacts of empty properties.

The budget speech announced improvements to rental subsidies. However, it then opted to postpone the regulation of the rental market. It announced a White Paper on the subject which, when published, will propose ways of regulating the market without in any way regulating the subject of rents. In view of the currently abnormal situation of sky-high rents, this is sheer madness.

It is fine to ensure that the duties and responsibilities of landlords and tenants are clearly spelt out. Does anyone argue with that in 2017? It should have been done years ago. Instead of a White Paper a Legal Notice defining clear-cut duties and responsibilities would suffice: there is no need to wait.

It is, however, too much to bear when a “social democrat” Finance Minister declares  that he will not even consider rent control. There are ways and means of ensuring that the market acts fairly. Other countries have done it and are still doing it, as rental greed has no preferred nationality. Ignoring this possibility is not a good omen. The market should not be glorified by the Finance Minister; it should be tamed rather than further encouraged to keep running wild with the resulting social havoc it has created.

This brings us to transport and roads. The Finance Minister sends a clear message when he stated (on page 44 of the budget speech) that no one should be under the illusion that upgrading the road infrastructure will, on its own, resolve the traffic (congestion) problem. Edward Scicluna hints on the following page of his speech that he is not too happy with the current situation. He laments that the more developed countries encourage active mobility through walking, cycling and the use of motorbikes, as well as various means of public transport, simultaneously discouraging the use of the private car. However, he does not then proceed to the logical conclusion of his statement: scrapping large-scale road infrastructural projects such as the proposed Marsa flyover or the proposed tunnels below the Santa Luċija roundabout announced recently by Minister Ian Borg.

These projects, like the Kappara flyover currently in its final stages, will only serve to increase the capacity of our roads. And this means only one thing: more cars on our roads. It is certified madness.

While the Government’s policy of increasing the capacity of existing roads through the construction of flyovers and tunnels will address congestion in the short term, it will lead to increased traffic on our roads. This moves the problem to the future, when it will be worse and more difficult to tackle. The government is acting like an overweight individual who ‘solves’ the problem of his expanding wasteline by changing his wardrobe instead of going on a painful but necessary diet.

This cancels out the positive impact of other policies announced in the budget speech such as free public transport to young people aged between 16 and 20, free (collective) transport to all schools, incentives for car-pooling, grants encouraging the purchase of bicycles, pedelec bicycles and scooters, reduction in the VAT charged when hiring bicycles as well as the introduction of bicycle lanes, as well as encouraging the purchase of electric or hybrid vehicles.

All this contributes to the current environmental deficit. And I have not even mentioned issues of land use planning once.

Published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 15 October 2017

Iż-żewġ verżjonijiet tal-budget

edward scicluna budget 2016


L-iżbalji jagħmilhom kulħadd. Peró fuq materji ta’ serjetà kbira bħalma hu l-budget hemm Dipartiment sħiħ tal-Gvern li suppost għandu jnaqqas il-possibilità ta’ żbalji kbar.

L-iżball jidher li kien illi l-verżjoni tad-diskors li ttieħdet biex tkun stampata kienet waħda bikrija, u mhux l-aħħar waħda. Bil-konsegwenza li l-kopja tad-diskors li ngħatat kmieni lill-Opposizzjoni kif ukoll dik li tqegħdet fuq il-mejda tal-Parlament kienet il-kopja żbaljata. Anke l-kopja li għal xi ħin kienet online kienet dik żbaljat.

Id-diskrepanza eżatta għadni ma nafx x’inhi imma jidher li hemm differenza ta’ madwar 50 miżura bejn iż-żewġ verżjonijiet tal-budget. Matul il-ġranet u l-ġimgħat li ġejjin, bla dubju nisimgħu iktar dwar dawn id-diskrepanzi.

Konna nafu li nqala’ xi ħaġa għax sal-ħin li qed nikteb dan il-blogpost għad m’għandix kopja stampata tad-dokumenti tal-budget. Qed nagħmel użu mill-verżjoni elettronika li kif tafu mhux dejjem hi l-aħjar verżjoni li tuża meta tkun qed tagħmel użu minnha fit-tul.

Il-Ministru Scicluna m’għandu l-ebda tort li sar l-iżball. Peró seta evita li jħalli l-inċident jikber kieku spjega mill-ewwel x’ġara nhar it-Tnejn qabel ma beda jaqra l-budget.

Bla dubju, daqsxejn umiltà kienet tagħmel il-ġid.