The climate risks we face

The first ever European climate risk assessment carried out by the European Environment Agency (EEA) has concluded that Europe is unprepared for what lies in store.

The year 2023 was the warmest year ever. The global average temperature during 2023 has surpassed the threshold of 1.5 degrees Celsius set in the Paris agreement at the 2015 Climate Summit.

Europe is the fastest warming continent. The situation in Southern Europe is even worse. It will face considerably reduced rainfall and more severe droughts.

At this point, none of this is however news. It is already the present. The future may, however, be even worse than that.

In a 425-page report we are told that climate change is a multiplier of risks: existing risks will be aggravated. Climate risks are growing much faster than our preparedness. We are being extremely slow in developing and implementing climate change adaptation strategies.

36 major climate risks for Europe have been identified. They are grouped in five clusters, namely, ecosystems, food, health, infrastructure, and the economy/finance.  

The key findings of this first European climate risk assessment, which I quote verbatim from the EEA report, are:

“Ecosystems: climate change is one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation in Europe. Among climate risks related to ecosystems, risks to coastal and marine ecosystems have the highest severity in the current period as well as the greatest urgency to act.

Food: Europe faces multiple challenges to food production and food security, including reducing its environmental impact. Crop production is already facing substantial climate risks in Europe as a whole, and critical risk levels in Southern Europe.

Health: climate change poses major risks to human health systems. Risks related to heat are already at critical levels in southern Europe.

Infrastructure: extreme weather events are posing increasing risks to the built environment and infrastructure in Europe, and the services they provide. Such events can disrupt essential services, including energy supply, water supply and transport networks.

Economy and finance: the European financial system faces critical risks from the impacts of climate change, both within Europe and abroad. Serious sector- and region-specific risks to Europe could catalyse a systemic financial shock.” (page 264: para 18.6 of the report)

This is a wakeup call of the highest order. The European continent is unprepared for the growing extremes of climate. Yet senior politicians at an EU level are more interested in sabotaging specific initiatives which seek to bridge the gap in climate change preparedness. The recent debate (and voting patterns) on the regulatory framework for the restoration of nature is a case in point.

The recent Dutch farmers’ revolt which has shaken the Netherlands’ body politic has its origin in the difficulties encountered in implementing the Nitrates Directive. It has however spread to other regions, motivated by the industrial agricultural lobby’s determination to sabotage the EU Green Deal.

In Germany the centre-right CDU-CSU have just launched their joint EU Parliament electoral manifesto with a pledge to reverse the controversial phase-out of the internal combustion engine. A definite commitment to water-down the EU Green Deal. The CDU-CSU leading candidate is the same person piloting the EU Green Deal, Ursula von der Leyen.

With these attitudes it is inevitable that our preparedness for the climate risks we face will get even worse. This is the future we face. It keeps getting worse until those that matter come to their senses.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 17 March 2024

Institutional fragmentation obstructs good governance

Some seek to deceive themselves and others when they proclaim their conviction that there is no conflict between the economy and the environment. The current state of affairs in all areas of environmental importance is precisely the result of this conflict.

This conflict is continuously manifested through various natural phenomena: nature’s retaliatory actions to the mismanagement of the earth’s resources. Currently climate change tops the list of nature’s defensive actions in the ongoing conflicts resulting from the impacts of the economy on the environment.

The impacts of climate change effect all of us, but most of all they effect the vulnerable among us. Whether it is floods or drought, extremes of temperatures or rising sea levels, at the end of the day it is the vulnerable and the poor who shoulder most of the burden which results when the earth cries. “Cry of the earth, cry of the poor”, we were told many years ago by Brazilian Franciscan liberation theologian Leonardo Boff. Environmental degradation and social injustice are intertwined.

Emissions to air, sea or land: all of them have an impact, generally a cumulative one, which contaminate in various ways the air we breathe, the sea and its resources and all sorts of natural resources all around us. These impacts generally take time to leave their mark and as a result of this time lag, generally, they are ignored until it is almost too late to act.

Parliament is currently debating the setting up of a Climate Change Authority. Concluding the debate at second reading stage, Environment Minister Miriam Dalli emphasized that climate action requires everyone’s contribution. Yes Minister, that is correct: however, it also requires consistency on the part of the executive. One cannot advocate addressing climate change at the same time as dishing out fossil fuel subsidies, as government has been doing for quite some time.

To address climate change we require a behavioral change. Having public transport available at no cost was a courageous step which seeks to address this behavioral change through encouraging a modal shift in our mobility requirements. On its own, however, this is definitely not enough.

In order to facilitate this modal shift to take place, it is essential that, simultaneously with free public transport one should discourage the use of private transport. Removing the fossil fuel subsidies the soonest would be a step in this direction.

Likewise, the heavy investment in road infrastructure aiming to facilitate traffic management also encourages more traffic on the road. It has been proven by studies carried out in a multitude of other countries that infrastructural interventions in the road network will, in the end, increase traffic congestion because they end up generating more traffic. This is actually happening around us too!

A stronger push towards a behavioral change would address both our deficits: our fiscal deficit as well as our environmental deficit.

The electrification of transport would definitely help in reducing climate change impacts. It will not however contribute to the modal shift in addressing our mobility requirements.

The fact that in most cases travelling distances in Malta are small should facilitate the effort. As emphasized by the National Transport Masterplan we ought to realise that fifty per cent of trips with private cars in the Maltese islands are for distances having a duration of less than 15 minutes. Further, these trips cover an average distance of 5.5 kilometers. This signifies that half of the trips with private cars cover mobility needs within areas which are within easy reach of either local public transport or else can be covered by walking or cycling. Addressing adequately just this statistic could reduce substantially cars from our roads without in any way impacting our mobility needs. In addition, substantial emissions contributing to climate change would also be reduced.

This is what we call a low-lying fruit in the management and implementation of environmental policy. It is an objective which is not so difficult to attain. Yet it is unfortunately ignored.

A positive step taken by the Robert Abela led administration is the apparent shelving of the proposed undersea tunnel between Malta and Gozo. Studies carried out have clearly shown that the economic viability of the tunnel was dependent on increasing by about three times the car movements between Malta and Gozo. As a result, additional environmental impacts would have been created!

I speak of an “apparent shelving” as the matter is not yet clear. Government has not made any statement on its intentions even though it is clear that it has had second thoughts on the whole matter, as it is no longer “a priority”.

The fragmentation of the institutions intended for environmental governance does not lead to good governance. It rather obstructs it. It would have been more appropriate if the functions assigned to the proposed Climate Change Authority had been assigned to the Environment and Resources Authority. The consolidation of environmental functions would be appropriate in view of the smallness of our territories. It would also be more effective.

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 25 February 2024

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme and the Malta Freeport

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) has been in place for the past 20 years, since 2003. It deals with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions through the use of market-based instruments. Initially maritime emissions were excluded from its operation.

The debate at an EU level as to when greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime industry would no longer be excluded from this regulatory process has been ongoing for quite some time. Extending the applicability of the EU ETS to maritime transport was a crucial next step, no longer avoidable after the 2015 Paris Climate Summit.

At Paris there was unanimous agreement between the participating states that urgent action needed to be taken in order to contain the increase in global temperature to possibly no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial global temperature. Achieving that aim would be of considerable help in reducing climate change impacts, including the potential rise in sea level, a serious threat to islands and coastal areas.

As an island state with a substantially developed coast, Malta has an interest in arresting the projected sea level rise, the soonest possible. At least an interest in reducing it to the minimum possible. Depending on its extent, a sea level rise will be extremely damaging to Malta’s infrastructure.

Everybody is aware that as of the 1 January 2024 cargo and passenger ships having a gross tonnage of 5000 tonnes or over will be subject to the EU ETS scheme as a result of which they will pay for their carbon emissions. Initially such payments will cover 40 per cent of their emissions. This will rise to 70 per cent in 2025 and then to 100 per cent from 2026 onwards. This is an application of the polluter pays principle. A basic principle in international environmental law enshrined in the EU treaties and incorporated as well in the Maltese statute book.

The scheme will be operating within the European Union and consequently there will be shipping lines which will try to better organise themselves in order to avoid payment for their carbon emissions. This fact was highlighted some weeks ago by Alex Montebello, the CEO of the Freeport Terminal, who argued, in an article published in the local press, that the North African ports, to which the EU ETS does not apply, as they are not part of an EU member state, will be placed at a competitive advantage. Consequently, most probably, the Malta Freeport Terminal will lose substantially its transhipment role. The Malta Freeport’s loss, he argued, will be the gain of other ports along the southern Mediterranean shores, such as Damietta, Tangier Med or East Port Said.

Now this is an interesting argument which most probably was considered by the negotiators on behalf of the Maltese Government when they handled the matter in Brussels.

In fact, a substantial number of islands within the EU territory are exempted from the provisions of ETS if they satisfy the applicable criteria. Having a population which is less than 200,000 and no road or rail links with the European mainland are the criteria to be met. As a result, the port of Imġarr in Gozo is the only exempted Maltese port which is included in the relative EU implementation decision published in the Official Journal of the EU on the 19 December 2023.

No explanation has been forthcoming from Government, and I would not dare speculate as to the reason why the Maltese negotiators failed to ensure that the transhipment role of the Freeport Terminal at Marsaxlokk Bay was defended appropriately.  The locality of Birżebbuġa, possibly, stands to gain, inadvertently, as a result of this failure.

Obviously, Malta cannot possibly be exempted as this would defeat the whole purpose of the EU ETS which is that of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Possibly, for a change, as a country we have started taking our responsibilities seriously. Maybe we can now start the long process of aligning our economy with our environmental responsibilities.

Well, it is never too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 7 January 2024

A ticking time bomb

The proposal to set up an authority to deal with climate change regulation, mitigation and adaptation, announced by Prime Minister Robert Abela during an MCESD meeting last week, though well-intentioned, is uncalled for. It essentially means more fragmentation in matters related to environmental governance.

We have been there before during the debate on land use planning and the environment with the resulting merger and subsequent demerger.

The actual results achieved as a consequence of the planned fragmentation have increased the existing environmental mess exponentially.

Environmental governance requires consolidation and not fragmentation in order to be effective.

The effective coordination of policy formulation, regulation and implementation in all environmental issues can be achieved. However, for this to happen we ought to realise that the smallness of our country is an asset which is currently ignored but which we can put to good use.

Rather than have a separate authority dealing with climate change it would be more appropriate to beef up the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) and ensure that it is run appropriately.

Climate change is a ticking time bomb that is confirmed as being progressively worse with every scientific report that is published. The current heat-wave and the flooding that we have witnessed in the past winter are clear indications of what lies in store for all of us in the immediate future.

We are no exceptions. Nature does not discriminate; it treats us all equally. It just rolls over all of us as it did elsewhere with floods, fires and other extremes of weather.

In these circumstances the realistic way forward is not to set up more authorities but, rather, to seek the way in which we can maximise our existing efforts through proper coordination and, where possible, the consolidation of existing official bodies and authorities. This could lead to the optimisation of results and better value reflecting the resources put to use. We cannot, as a nation, afford to do otherwise.

It must be a carefully studied political decision but not a partisan one. Ideally, the government should try and rope in the best local minds to carefully plot the way forward. It should search beyond the political divide. This is possible if there is the political will.

There is so much we can do. It can, however, be painful, as it would require unavoidable changes to our lifestyle. We must continuously remember that there is no gain without pain. With appropriate and timely action, the pain can, however, be minimised.

The longer we take to get our house in order, the greater the pain inflicted on all: it will be self-inflicted pain as we can avoid or reduce part of it if we act in good time. Even though time is running out, it is still possible to take meaningful action. All of us will be impacted, but the vulnerable will be impacted most of all.

The action required encompasses practically all that we do. It impacts land use and urban planning, agriculture, tourism, transport, energy consumption and generation, air quality, water management, nature protection and restoration – practically everything around us. Consequently, it will also have a considerable impact on our economic activity.

The month of July that just ended has been the hottest on record. We are still reeling from its impacts on the energy distribution network. There are other impacts that we will have to address, shortly. We have to (and can) anticipate all this through foresight and appropriate planning.

All the required information to help us plan a better future that factors in climate change is already available. This information has been available for a considerable number of years but it has been conveniently ignored as the political establishment has always sought to paint a future landscape which is out of tune with reality.

This is the real challenge we face: to plan our future realistically. The longer we take to get our feet on the ground the more difficult it will be to achieve the required results. We owe it to future generations to ensure that when we pass on the baton, these islands are still liveable. So far, this is most clearly not achievable.

published in Times of Malta: 3 August 2023

Lejn politika dwar is-sigurtà meħtieġa fl-enerġija

Il-politika ta’ Malta dwar l-enerġija teħtieġ li tassigura li jkollna l-enerġija elettrika li neħtieġu u li din, safejn hu possibli ma tkunx dipendenti fuq wisq fatturi varjabbli.

Nhar l-Erbgħa, għal darb’oħra kellna qtugħ fil-provista tal-elettriku fil-parti l-kbira tal-pajjiż.  Kien qtugħ li ma damx għax il-ħaddiema tal-Enemalta, b’dedikazzjoni, solvew il-problema f’qasir żmien.  Imma, sal-ħin li qed nikteb dak li wassal għall-qtugħ tal-provista tal-elettriku għadu mhux magħruf.

Dan seħħ wara qtugħ ieħor nhar l-10 ta’ Frar, qtugħ li kien ferm iktar mifrux. Dakinnhar konna infurmati li kien hemm il-problemi ġejjin mill- interconnector tal-enerġija elettrika bejn Malta u Sqallija.

Waqt il-maltempata li ħakmet il-gżejjer Maltin il-ġimgħa l-oħra, it-tanker tal-gass kien skunnettjat għal xi siegħat bħala miżura ta’ prewkazzjoni, biex ikunu evitati inċidenti u ħsara. F’dan il-ħin kritiku, minn Delimara ma ħadniex farka elettriku għax il-gass kien skunnettjat. Riżultat ta’ dan konna dipendenti għal kollox fuq l-interconnector ma’ Sqallija għall-elettriku f’dak il-ħin.  Huwa f’dan il-kuntest li għal kważi sagħtejn sħaħ l-interconnector ma kienx qed jiffunzjona: l-parti l-kbira tal-gżejjer Maltin kienu bla elettriku, simultanjament la kien qed jaħdem l-interconnector u l-anqas il-power station ta’ Delimara! Dik sigurta!

L-incidenti jseħħu l-ħin kollu. Dak li ġara, iżda, ma jistax ikun deskritt bħala incident. Kien il-konsegwenza loġika tal-politika dwar il-ġenerazzjoni tal-enerġija f’dawn il-gżejjer. Hu riżultat tal-fiduċja għamja fl-interconnector li wasslitna għal dipendenza sħiħa fuqu. Tant din il-fiduċja għamja rabbiet għeruq fondi li issa qed jippjanaw it-tieni interconnector biex issa jassiguraw li nkunu għal kollox dipendenti fuqhom. Flok ma jnaqqas id-dipendenza fil-qasam tal-enerġija dan il-Gvern qed jippjana li jżidha!

Min qed jaqra bla dubju jiftakar dwar id-drabi li ankri tal-vapuri għamlu ħsara lill-interconnector tal-enerġija bejn Malta u Sqallija. Dan seħħ ftit il-barra mill-kosta ta’ Sqallija meta tanker li jtajjar il-bandiera ta’ Singapore bl-isem Di Matteo ikkawża ħsara kbira fl-interconnector fl-2019 ftit il-barra minn Ragusa. Dan seħħ ukoll ftit il-barra minn mal-kosta ta’ Baħar iċ-Ċagħaq meta il-vapur Chem P kważi nkalja f’Marzu 2022. L-ankra tiegħu tkaxkret ma’ qiegħ il-baħar u anke dakinnhar saret ħsara sostanzjali lill-interconnector.

L-interconnector hu kalamita għal dawn l-inċidenti, kemm fl-ibħra Maltin kif ukoll f’dawk Sqallin. Bit-traffiku marittimu li hawn f’dawn l-inħawi, dawn l-inċidenti ser jibqgħu jigru. Ftit li xejn jistgħu jkunu evitati

Ħadd f’sensieh ma għandu jippjana t-twettieq ta’politika enerġetika dipendenti fuq sitwazzjoni bħal din. Imma dan hu eżattament dak li ġara: hekk ippjanaw, u hekk wettqu l-gvernijiet Maltin, wieħed wara l-ieħor!   Sfortunatament l-istat attwali tal-politika tal-enerġija ta’ Malta hi riżultat ta’ din il-kwalità ta’ tmexxija ħażina. L-insulti u l-kliem dispreġġjattiv waqt is-seduti Parlamentari ma jsolvu xejn.

Fir-realtà hu irrelevanti jekk l-interconnector żviluppax il-ħsara minħabba li kien qed jintuża żżejjed inkella jekk żviluppax il-ħsara riżultat ta’ xi ħaġa oħra. Ir-realtà li irridu niffaċċjaw hi li l-qtugħ tad-dawl qed ikun frekwenti u li dan mhux aċċettabbli.

L-ispiża biex tissewwa l-ħsara li ġarrab l- interconnector hi waħda sostanzjali. Imma din mhi xejn ħdejn il-ħsara li qed issir lill-ekonomija tal-pajjiż u lir-reputazzjoni tiegħu riżultat ta’politika tal-enerġija bla sens.  

Jeħtieġ li nifhmu li huwa mportanti li nagħtu l-attenzjoni xierqa lill-politika dwar l-enerġija. It-tieni   interconnector m’għandniex bżonnu! Minflok neħtieġu li nintensifikaw il-ħidma biex tiżdied il-ġenerazzjoni ta’ enerġija rinovabbli. Hu meħtieġ ukoll li naċċelleraw ix-xogħol li qieġhed isir biex tissaħħaħ is-sistema tad-distribuzzjoni tal-elettriku għax dan jagħmilha possibli li niġġeneraw iktar enerġija rinovabbli minn fuq il-bjut tad-djar tagħna.  Sakemm is-sistema tad-distribuzzjoni tal-elettriku tissaħħaħ, dan il-potenzjal huwa limitat.

Proġetti kbar immirati biex tkun iġġenerata iktar enerġija rinovabbli permezz ta’ iktar investiment jistgħu jimxu id f’id ma’proġetti żgħar fuq il-bjut tad-djar tagħna. Jekk dan isir sewwa nistgħu mmorru lil hinn mill-mira li hemm fl-abbozz tal-istrateġija nazzjonali dwar l-iżvilupp sostenibbli li  b’mod inspjegabbli tillimata is-sehem tal-enerġija rinovabbli għall-11.5 fil-mija tal-enerġija li nużaw. Għandna bżonn li jkollna miri ferm iktar ambizzjużi minn hekk!  Mira ta’ 50 fil-mija għall-enerġja rinovabbli fuq perjodu ta’ għaxar snin tkun ferm iktar addattata għal dak li neħtieġu bħala pajjiż. Bla miri ambizzjużi ftit hemm ċans li nilħqu l-mira ta’ newtralità fl-emissjonijiet tal-karbonju sal-2050.

Meta jimmaterjalizza l-pipeline tal-gass li jkun jista’ jintuża ukoll biex nużw l-idroġenu, dan, waħdu ma jkunx biżżejjed biex nilħqu l-miri meħtieġa fit-triq għan-newtralita karbonika.

Il-Gvernijiet Maltin, fil-passat kienu kuntenti jħabbru li rnexxielhom jinnegozjaw tnaqqis fil-mira ta’ Malta dwar il-ġenerazzjoni ta’ enerġija rinovabbli minn 20 għal 10 fil-mija.  Issa irridu “ngawdu” l-piż ta’ din il-politika bla viżjoni fit-tul, politika mijopika. Jekk ma nibdlux ir-rotta ma nistgħux nimxu l-quddiem lejn politika realistika li tassigura s-sigurtà tal-provista tal-enerġija tagħna fost oħrajn billi telimina d-dipendenza li għandna fuq l-interconnector bejn Malta u Sqallija, kemm dak li għandna kif ukoll dak ipproġettat.

Towards a much-needed energy security policy

Malta’s energy policy must necessarily ensure that we have a constant supply of electrical energy which, as far as is reasonable, is not dependable on too many variable factors.

On Wednesday morning for the umpteenth time, we had an unplanned power cut across the islands. It was brief as Enemalta’s dedicated labour force restored power in a short time. At the time of writing the cause of the power cut is still unknown.

This follows another power cut, much more widespread, on 10 February, when, we were informed that there were problems with the Malta-Sicily energy interconnector.

During the storm which battered the Maltese islands last week the LNG tanker was temporarily out of action for a number of hours as a safety precaution. During this critical time the electricity normally supplied by the Delimara power station had to be made good for by the interconnector. It is within this context, the interconnector, was, for around two long hours inoperative with a large part of the islands being without electricity, as neither the interconnector nor the Delimara power station were functioning simultaneously. How is that for energy security?

Accidents do happen. This was however no accident! It was the logical consequence of the politics of energy generation in these islands. It is a case of trusting too much the interconnector and being dependent on it. This misplaced trust is so much ingrained in the local political set-up that a second interconnector is planned: this will ensure that we are completely dependent on the interconnectors. Instead of reducing energy dependency government strives to increase it!

Readers would undoubtedly remember the number of times ship anchors have damaged the energy interconnector between Malta and Sicily. It happened off the coast of Sicily when the anchors of the Singaporean flagged tanker Di Matteo caused extensive damage to the interconnector in December 2019 off the Ragusa coast. It also happened just off the Baħar iċ-Ċagħaq coast when the vessel Chem P almost ran aground in March 2022. It dragged its anchor along the seabed causing extensive damage to the interconnector in the process.

The interconnector is clearly accident prone, both in Maltese waters as well as in the Sicilian Channel. Due to the substantial maritime traffic in the region, these accidents will inevitably re-occur.

No one in his right senses would plan the implementation of an energy policy dependent on these factors. But this is just what successive Maltese governments have planned and implemented. Unfortunately, the current state of Malta’s energy policy is the direct result of its mismanagement. The trading of insults across the parliamentary chamber will not solve anything.

Its immaterial whether the interconnector tripped as a result of being overloaded or whether it developed a fault as a result of something else. The net result is that power stoppage is becoming to frequent an occurrence, and this is unacceptable.

The expense incurred in repairs to the interconnector are substantial. This is however insignificant when compared to the damage which is being inflicted on our economy and on the country’s reputation as a result of a myopic energy policy.

We need to get our energy priorities right very quickly. Plans for a second interconnector should be scrapped the soonest. Instead, the current drive to increase the generation of renewable energy should be intensified. Likewise, we should accelerate the reinforcement of our electricity distribution system as this would make it possible to increase the generation of renewable energy from the rooftops of our dwellings. This potential is currently capped as a result of a distribution system which cannot handle the increased electricity load which would be generated as a result of a larger input of renewable energy from our households.

Macro-projects aimed at generating more renewable energy as a result of business investment can co-exist with micro-projects handled by our households. If this is done properly, maybe we can go much further then projected in the draft National Sustainable Development Strategy which mysteriously has us anchored at an “11.5 per cent share of renewable energy in gross final energy consumption”. We need more ambitious targets than that! Achieving a 50 per cent target for renewable energy generation over a ten-year timeframe would be more suitable to our needs and requirements. Without ambitious targets we will never achieve the 2050 carbon neutrality objective.

The projected pipeline which, when it materialises could possibly be used to switch over from LNG to hydrogen will, on its own be insufficient in the march towards carbon neutrality.

Maltese governments have in the past years been happy in announcing successful negotiations in reducing EU renewable energy targets applicable to Malta from 20 to 10 per cent. We are now shouldering the consequences of that myopic policy. It is about time that we change course. Only then can we move steadfastly towards a realistic policy which ensures our energy security, shedding in the process our dependence on the existing and projected interconnectors between Malta and Sicily.

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 19 February 2023

Kultura ta’ dipendenza

Il-baġit għall-2023 li l-Ministru tal-Finanzi Clyde Caruana ippreżenta lill-Parlament nhar it-Tnejn għandu jkun deskritt bħala wieħed li jsaħħaħ kultura ta’ dipendenza.  Il-Gvern jagħmel użu mit-tqassim taċ-ċekkijiet biex jilħaq dan l-iskop! Id-dipendenza fuq il-Gvern, taħt il-Labour hi oġġettiv  inkoraġġit. Is-sitwazzjoni minn baġit għall-ieħor tmur mill-ħażin għall-agħar.

Dan hu forsi l-iktar ċar mill-mod kif il-Gvern imexxi l-quddiem il-politika tiegħu dwar il-pagi. Żviluppat differenza kbira bejn id-daqs tal-paga minima u kemm verament teħtieġ biex tgħix. Il-Gvern qed jipprova jindirizza din id-differenza billi jqassam iċ-ċekkijiet. Issa ħoloq COLA ġdida biex jgħin lill-vulnerabbli u dan flimkien ma numru ta’ sussidji li uħud minnhom mhux neċessarji inkella huma ta’ ħsara.

 Il-ħolqien ta’ dan il-benefiċċju ġdid għall-persuni vulnerabbli (80,000 skond il-Ministru) li ma jistgħux ilaħħqu mal-ħajja, hu pass pożittiv. Il-vulnerabbli jeħtieġu l-għajnuna, imma jeħtieġu ferm iktar minn ċekk ta’ madwar €300 li ser jitqassam fi żmien il-Milied. Kien ikun ferm iktar għaqli kieku l-Gvern iffoka fuq il-problema reali u indirizza din il-probema bis-serjetà. Issa ilu żmien ikaxkar saqajh.

Il-problema reali hi li l-paga minima hi baxxa ħafna: hi ferm il-bogħod minn paga li tista’ tgħix biha. Gvern wara l-ieħor għamel ħiltu biex din il-problema jevitha. Tajjeb li niftakru li l-benefiċċji soċjali, fil-parti l-kbira tagħhom, huma marbuta mal-paga minima u huma rifless tagħha. Paga minima diċenti awtomatikament teffettwa l-benefiċċji soċjali li riżultat ta’ hekk jitjiebu sostanzjalment, bi dritt.

Tul dawn l-aħħar għaxar snin tlett rapporti tal-Caritas analizzaw din il-materja fil-fond. L-aħħar rapport, li nħareġ fl-2021, kien ikkonkluda li hemm diskrepanza ta’ 40 fil-mija bejn il-paga minima u dak meħtieġ biex wieħed jgħix b’mod diċenti. Dan jammonta għal diskrepanza ta’ madwar €4,000 fis-sena. Din hi l-problema rejali!

Sakemm nibqgħu bil-paga minima baxxa daqshekk, it-tqassim fuq stil tar-rigali tal-Milied (Father Christmas) ser jibqgħu jsiru biex jitnaqqas il-piz minn fuq spallejn il-vulnerabbli. Xi drabi ir-rigali ta’ Father Christmas ma jkunux limitati għall-vulnerabbli imma qed jinfirxu ma kulħadd. Hekk ġara biċ-ċekkijiet ta’ qabel l-elezzjoni, u l-hekk imsejħa rifużjoni tat-taxxa!

Flok din id-dipendenza fuq dan it-tqassim, ikun iktar xieraq li l-paga minima tiżdied u issir paga li tista’ tgħix biha.  Dan jista’ jsir billi l-baskett ta’ oġġetti u servizzi li fuqu tkun ikkalkulata l-paga minima jkun aġġornat regolarment. Dan jelimina l-ħtieġa tat-tqassim ta’ cekkijiet ta’ kull xorta fil-parti l-kbira tal-każi għax il-paga raġjonevoli tkun ir-regola: ma jkunx hemm ħtieġa tal-benvolenza politika tal-Gvern, la fi żmien il-baġit u l-anqas, fi żmien ta’ elezzjoni ġenerali kif, b’mod abbużiv diġa sar.

B’żieda ma’ dan it-tqassim taċ-ċekkijiet bi pjaċir, flok pagi ġusti bi dritt, tajbin biex wieħed jgħix bihom, il-Gvern qiegħed ukoll japplika numru ta’ sussidji li huma mfasslin b’mod żbaljat.

Is-sussidji tal-petrol u d-dijżil huma żejda. Iż-żieda internazzjonali fil-prezz tal-petrol u d-dijżil, li huma madwar id-doppju ta’ dak li qed inħallsu Malta, hi opportunità unika li f’idejn kapaċi tista’ tikkoreġi l-iżbalji li għamel il-Gvern fil-konfront tal-problema tagħna tad-dipendenza fuq il-karozza privata.

Flok is-sussidji fuq il-prezz tal-petrol u d-dijżil ikun aħjar kieku ninvestu fl-effiċjenza u l-puntwalità tat-trasport pubbliku. Din hi opportunità unika li, f’idejn min jifhem tista’, fit-tul, twassal għal tibdil fl-imġieba tan-nies favur użu iktar tat-trasport pubbliku u użu inqas tal-karozzi privati.  L-introduzzjoni ta’ transport pubbliku b’xejn għal kulħadd mill-bidu ta’ dan ix-xahar kien pass primatur: l-effiċjenza u l-puntwalità tat-trasport pubbliku kellu jkun indirizzat ferm qabel ma ttieħed dan il-pass importanti.

Li tkun indirizzat id-dipendenza fuq il-karozzi privati hu oġġettiv politiku li l-Gvern stess ippropona fil-Pjan Nazzjonali dwar it-Trasport. Il-Gvern qiegħed jinjora l-pjan tiegħu stess.

Min-naħa l-oħra hu xieraq li l-konsum bażiku tal-ilma u l-elettriku fir-residenzi tagħna jibqa’ jkun issussidjat. Imma hu żball li is-sussidju japplika ukoll għall-konsum kollu ta’ kulħadd. Ikun ferm aħjar jekk setturi differenti tal-ekonomija jkollhom aċċess għal għajnuna mfassla għall-ħtiġijiet tagħhom sakemm iddum il-kriżi kurrenti.   Dan jista’ jagħti protezzjoni ferm ikbar kemm lill-impiegi kif ukoll lill-ekonomija. Fuq kollox b’dan il-mod jista’ jkun evitat li jkun issussidjat il-ħela u l-abbuż fl-użu tal-ilma u l-elettriku.

Ma hemmx ħtieġa li nsaħħu kultura ta’ dipendenza fil-forma ta’ tqassim ta’ ċekkijiet inkella b’sussidji mhux meħtieġa.  Huwa tajjeb li l-vulnerabbli jkunu mgħejjuna. Imma li tinbena u tissaħħaħ kultura ta’ dependenza bħala riżultat ta’ politika skaduta dwar il-pagi hi xi ħaġa ferm differenti. Dan jagħmel ħsara lit-tessut soċjali tal-pajjiż u għandu jinġieb fit-tmiem l-iktar kmieni possibli.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: il-Ħadd 30 t’Ottubru 2022

A Culture of Dependency

The budget for 2023 presented to Parliament by Finance Minister Clyde Caruana last Monday may be described as one which reinforces a culture of dependency. Government handouts are used, left, right and centre to achieve this objective. Under Labour the culture of dependency is actively encouraged: it gets worse with every budget.

This is most clear in the manner in which government deals with incomes policy. A chasm has developed between the actual minimum wage and what is required as a living wage. Government tries to bridge this through various handouts including the newly created special COLA for the vulnerable as well as through subsidies, some of which are unnecessary or damaging.

The creation of a new ad hoc benefit payable to vulnerable persons (estimated by the Minister at 80,000 persons) who cannot cope with the current rate of inflation is a positive step. They definitely need help, but they need much more than an approximately €300 handout at Christmas time.  It would have been much better if government focused on the real problem and addressed it head-on. It has been procrastinating for ages.

The real problem is that the minimum wage is ridiculously low: it is far from being a living wage. Governments have repeated sought to avoid addressing this issue. It is pertinent to point out that social benefits are mostly pegged to the minimum wage. A minimum wage at a reasonable level would automatically adjust all social benefits to an equally reasonable level too.

Three Caritas reports have analysed the issue in depth in the last ten years. The last report issued in 2021 had found a 40 per cent discrepancy between the minimum wage and what is required as a living wage. This translates into approximately a €4,000 shortfall per annum. This is the real problem!

For so long as the minimum wage remains at such a low level, government handouts in Father Christmas style will remain the norm in order to reduce the burdens on the vulnerable. At times, this Father Christmas benevolence is not limited to the vulnerable but spread to the benefit of one and all. The pre-electoral handouts and the so-called tax refunds are just two examples.

Instead of being dependent on handouts, it would be appropriate if the minimum wage is a living wage. This can only be achieved through a regular updating of the basket of goods and services on the basis of which the quantum of the minimum wage is determined. This would eliminate the need for most handouts at any time of the year as all would get their dues as of right, on a regular basis, and not be dependent on the political benevolence of government, be it at budget time or else, abusively, on the eve of general elections as has already happened.

In addition to a policy of preferring handouts to a clear statutory determination of a fair living wage Government has also embarked on a policy of increased subsidies, designed in an ill-advised manner.

The subsidies applied to petrol and diesel are uncalled for. The current international spike in fuel prices – approximately double what we pay locally– is a unique opportunity which, if properly managed could make up for government’s lack of action to address the car dependency problem on the Maltese islands.

Instead of subsidising the price of petrol and diesel it would be much better to invest in the efficiency and reliability of public transport. This is a unique opportunity which if properly managed could be the beginning of a long-term behavioural change: away from the private car and towards public transport. Having free public transport for all as of this month was a pre-mature step: the efficiency and reliability of public transport should have been adequately addressed before embarking on such an important step.

Addressing car dependency head-on is a policy objective proposed by government’s own National Transport Master Plan but repeatedly ignored by government itself.

On the other hand, it is appropriate to subsidise basic water and electricity domestic consumption. One should however think beyond an across-the-board subsidy.  Having focused assistance to different sectors of the economy tailor-made to their specific needs for the duration of the current crises would yield far better results in protecting employment and the economy in the long-term. It would definitely avoid subsidisation of waste and misuse of water and electricity.  

We do not need to create or reinforce a culture of dependency in the form of handouts and unnecessary subsidies. Helping the vulnerable is laudable. Reinforcing a culture of dependency as a result of an outdated incomes policy is something quite different: it damages the social fabric and should be reversed the soonest!

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 30 October 2022

The regeneration of Marsa

The public consultation which commenced earlier this week relative to the regeneration of the inner part of the Grand Harbour along the coastal area of Marsa is most welcome. Marsa has been neglected for far too long.

The Planning Authority has been criticised in the past for its piecemeal reviews of the local plans. It is hoped that this exercise will be a holistic one. It is the whole of Marsa which should be addressed and not one tiny corner! The decay of Marsa as an urban centre needs to be addressed at the earliest opportunity. This will not be done through piecemeal local plan reviews but through a comprehensive planning exercise.

The proposed strategic vision, as directed by government, is however not a suitable one. Through the Planning Authority, government is proposing that the area subject of the consultation be transformed into a “prime tourism and leisure harbour destination”.

The primary question to be addressed is whether it is desirable for our economy to further increase its dependence on tourism. The answer to this basic question, in my view, is a clear no. It is thus not on to reserve more prime sites for tourism. Tourism has gobbled up too many prime sites. Too many land use planning policies have been compromised in the exclusive interest of the tourism industry.  

Tourism has also proven itself to be a very weak link in the economic chain. It has been brought down to its knees as a result of Covid19. It is still very weak and will take more time to recover. Understandably a significant part of its labour force has migrated to other sectors and is unwilling to return to work in the tourism sector.

Rather than more tourism we definitely need less of it.

Prior to Covid19 we had reached saturation levels in the tourism sector. The post-Covid19 impact period is a unique opportunity for tourism to be re-dimensioned in order to reduce its impacts on the community. Unfortunately, the Planning Authority is insensitive to all this: it plans to give us more of the same.  

The availability of the former power station site and its surroundings is definitely a unique opportunity which should not be squandered on the tourism industry.

The innermost part of the Grand Harbour has always been dedicated to the maritime sector for which this is a unique opportunity to re-organise, modernise and increase its contribution to the national economy while reducing its environmental impacts. Scaling down the ship-repairing facilities and moving them to outside the area earmarked for regeneration could shift this activity to close proximity of residential areas in localities which are close by. This should therefore be avoided.  Even though I doubt very much whether in practice it is that easy to shift these facilities.

The regeneration of the inner part of the Grand Harbour Area can be achieved without tying down the area to development which is tourism-linked. The consultation strategy itself identifies various other options and activities amongst which new business ventures which improve the overall well-being of the community.

The tourism industry itself, over two years ago, had sounded the alarm that the number of tourists arriving in Malta was too high: beyond that which the country can take sustainably. Research published at the same time had identified the first signs of turismofobia, a mixture of repudiation, mistrust and contempt for tourists and tourism. These are the first indications of social discontent with the pressures linked to tourism growth. They need to be addressed but are however being ignored.

There is obviously a need for less tourism, not more of it. Access to public investment has to be made available to other sectors.

The public consultation is in its initial stages, and it is still possible for the discussion to develop along different lines. The discussion required is one which addresses Marsa as a whole and which does not focus on just one tiny corner, even though it may be an important corner.

This is a unique opportunity for all stakeholders who can and should get involved to assist in the identification of a sustainable vision for the regeneration of Marsa as a whole: in the interests of all.

published on the Malta Independent on Sunday : 5 December 2021

Il-klima fi Glasgow: mill-kliem għall-fatti

Bil-kliem, illum il-ġurnata, jidher li hemm qbil wiesgħa bejn il-partiti politiċi dwar il-politika li tikkonċerna t-tibdil tal-klima. Dan imma mhux il-każ. Il-qbil hu wieħed superfiċjali.

Il-politika ħadra dejjem kienet waħda olistika li tħares lejn l-ekoloġija b’għożża.  Partiti oħra bdew jaraw illum (jew dan l-aħħar) dak li aħna ilna nitkellmu dwaru is-snin. Dak li rajna snin ilu b’konvinzjoni u analiżi ħaddieħor qed jintebaħ bih issa! Pass il-quddiem, imma ċertament mhux biżżejjed. Id-dewmien biex jiftħu għajnejhom fisser iktar ħsara li baqgħet takkumula.

Ilkoll kemm aħna niffurmaw parti minn din l-ekoloġija, li tagħtina servizz siewi l-ħin kollu. Mhux lilna biss tagħti dan is-serviżż iżda lin-natura kollha.

Dak kollu li naraw madwarna mhux tagħna. Aħna fil-fatt parti minnu. Dak li naraw hu disponibbli biex nagħmlu użu minnu. Qiegħed għandna għal ftit żmien, sakemm ngħadduh f’idejn dawk li ġejjin warajna.

Tul is-sekli l-bniedem ħares lejn l-ekoloġija b’mod differenti. Hemm min ħares lejha b’għożża. Hemm min fittex biss li jisfrutta kemm jista’. Hemm min ħaseb fil-lum biss. Hemm min ħares fit-tul u qegħda l-ħtiġijiet tiegħu jew tagħha b’responsabbiltà.

L-ekonomija u l-mod kif ngħixu mhux dejjem taw kaz tal-impatti fuq l-ekoloġija. Issa, ħafna drabi kien iktar importanti minn għada. Għax għada ma jġibx voti! Huma l-ġenerazzjonijiet tal-lum li jivvutaw. Il-ġenerazzjonijiet ta’ għada, għalissa ma jivvutawx.

L-ekoloġija kapaċi tissaporti. Imma hemm limitu dwar kemm tiflaħ tagħmel dan. Ilha snin tagħtina indikazzjonijiet li qed tixba’. Imma bosta ma tawx kaz. GħaI dawk li jaħsbu li kollox jiddependi mis-suq iktar kien (u għadu) importanti l-iżvilupp tal-ekonomija u tal-kumditajiet. Il-prezz għal dan kollu ma tħallasx, għadu pendenti.

Illum qegħdin fis-sitwazzjoni li aħna lkoll ser ikollna nħallsu l-kont kemm tal-impatti tagħna kif ukoll dawk tal-ġenerazzjonijiet li ġew qabilna u li tħallew jakkumulaw. Ġenerazzjonijiet li sfruttaw lill-ekoloġija u abbużaw mis-servizzi ekoloġiċi mingħajr ma ħasbu f’dawk li kellhom jiġu warajhom: il-ġenerazzjonijiet futuri. Il-bidla fil-klima hu l-kont bl-imgħax li qiegħed dejjem jiżdied. Kont li jrid jitħallas għax daqt jiskadi ż-żmien li nistgħu nagħmlu dan!

It-tibdil fil-klima hi riżultat ta’ dan kollu, riżultat tal-ħidma tal-bniedem tul l-aħħar mitejn sena, u iktar. Hu piz akkumulat li irċevejnieh mingħand ta’ qabilna u li għandna l-obbligu li nnaqqsuh biex dawk li ġejjin warajna jirtu dinja aħjar minn dik li writna aħna. Mhux biss għandna l-obbligu li nħallsu dan il-kont: fuq kollox irridu noqgħodu attenti u ma nżidux miegħu.

L-effetti fuqna s’issa huma l-estremi tat-temp: nixfa jew għargħar, sħana jew kesħa estrema.

Rajna l-għargħar fi Sqallija l-ġimgħa l-oħra. Iktar kmieni fis-sena rajna l-ħsara ikkawżata mill-għargħar fil-Ġermanja u fil-pajjiżi viċini.

Imma hemm effett ieħor gravi: l-għoli tal-livell tal-baħar. S’issa għad mhux inħossu dan l-effett. Imma fl-Oċejan Paċifiku diġa hemm xi gżejjer li bdew nieżla taħt l-ilma. Hu biss kwistjoni ta’ żmien meta anke aħna fil-Mediterran ikollna nindirizzaw dan ukoll.

L-għoli tal-livell tal-baħar, bħala pajjiż gżira għandu jinteressana ħafna għax jolqotna sewwa. Jeffettwa l-infrastruttura kostali tagħna. L-infrastruttura tal-kummerċ marittimu, l-infrastruttura turistika u anke dik tal-ilma u l-enerġija lkoll marbutin mal-kosta. L-għoli tal-livell tal-baħar joħloq problemi sostanzjali f’dan kollu. Jeffttwa ukoll il-bini kollu fil-qrib tal-kosta.

Ħadd ma jaf eżatt dwar kemm, kif u meta dan ser iseħħ. L-ewwel għax il-proċess li bih dan iseħħ għad mhux mifhum biżżejjed. Imma ukoll għax għalkemm ma nistgħux nevitawh nistgħu nnaqqsu l-impatt tiegħu billi nindirzzaw u nnaqqsu l-emissjonijiet tal-karbonju.

Repetutatament fil-laqgħat tal-UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention for Climate Change) li jsiru regolarment, kien hemm emfasi fuq il-ħtieġa li ż-żieda fit-temperatura globali minn kif kienet fl-era pre-industrijali ma tkunx iktar minn 1.5 gradi Celsius. Dan sar fuq insistenza tal-istati gżejjer u tal-pajjiżi sottożviluppati għax għal snin twal il-limitu raġjonevoli kien meqjus li kien ta’ 2 gradi Celsius. Pass ieħor il-quddiem. Imma mhux biżżejjed.

F’Pariġu fl-2015 kien hemm qbil bil-kliem dwar dan kollu. Imma sfortunatament il-paroli ta’ Pariġi ma kienx ikkonvertit f’fatti. Huwa dak li qed nistennew fi Glasgow.

Diskors wara l-ieħor qed jgħidulna li jeħtieġ li ngħaddu mill-kliem għall-fatti. Għad irridu naraw kemm dan ser iseħħ! Dak li hu meħtieġ li jsir hu magħruf. Jinħtieġu deċiżjonijiet iebsin. Li jonqos hi r-rieda politika li dan jitwettaq.

ippubblikat fuq L-Orizzont : is-Sibt 6 ta’ Novembru 2021