A sustainable tourism policy!

The Malta Tourism Authority has announced that, during 2019, the Maltese Islands received a record 2.75 million tourists, an impressive jump from the 2010 figure of 1.33 million.

We are told that the expenditure on the part of tourists visiting Malta during 2019 exceeded €2.2 billion, surpassing the previous record set in 2018.

The numbers are quite impressive but the basic question to ask, however, goes beyond impressive numbers. Is this sustainable?

Some years back, a study carried out by MTA concluded that a tourist visiting the Maltese islands makes use of 50 per cent more resources that locals. I originally came across this information when going through one of the State of the Environment Reports. In brief, this signifies an additional per capita impact on all resources that we use – not just water and electricity, but also waste generated, transport, land developed and much more.

The statistics published by the National Statistics Office give positive news regarding inbound tourism to Malta. They do not, however, explain in any way the impacts generated as a result, which is something beyond the scope of statistics. It is not, however, appropriate to sing the praises with numbers and ignore these impacts. Some weeks ago, I discussed the issue of over-tourism in these pages. I posed the question as to whether the economic impact of tourism justifies its social and environmental impacts. The carrying capacity of our islands – that is, the number of tourists with which our resources can reasonably cope – is of fundamental importance. A tourism policy that does not adequately consider the carrying capacity of the Maltese Islands is fundamentally flawed.

Tourism Minister Julia Farrugia Portelli is apparently thinking on the same wavelength. When discussing the 2019 tourism results, she announced that a draft tourism policy leading us up to 2025, will be based on the principles of sustainable tourism “while building on achievements of the past years”.

Can tourism ever be sustainable? The term “sustainability”, as most of us are by now aware, is a much-abused word and it is often used out of context in an effort to try and justify anything.

In order to gauge the contribution of tourism to Maltese society, we should not only consider the earnings derived there from but should also factor in the costs – not just financial ones but also social and environmental costs.

To the 50 per cent excess consumption of resources per capita one must add not only the overdevelopment of land generated by tourism but also the contribution to climate change by the aviation industry. This is certainly not negligible and we only ignore it at our peril. We will undoubtedly hear much more about this as the debate on the EU Green Deal – piloted by EU Commissioner Frans Timmermans – unfolds over the coming weeks and months. We will then understand much better what policy-makers assume when they use the terms “sustainability” and “sustainable development”.

The proposed tourism vision for the years ahead will be myopic if it does not factor in environmental and social impacts. Policy makers should look beyond the financial bottom-line.

Way back in 2008, Catalan anthropologist Manoel Delgado had coined the term “turistofobia” which term conveys a mixture of repudiation, mistrust and contempt for tourists. A tourism policy should address these negative impacts of tourism by ensuring that it is restrained within the carrying capacity of the Maltese Islands. This would be a reasonable first step towards a tourism that is less unsustainable than at present.

published on The Independent on Sunday : 9 February 2020

Investigating Konrad’s MTA contract

It is known that Johann Buttigieg, former Chief Executive at the Planning Authority, was squeezed out of his post by Minister Ian Borg. Johann Buttigieg, however, found an ally in Konrad Mizzi, then Minister for Tourism, who facilitated his employment as the new Chief Executive of the Malta Tourism Authority.

By the time Johann Buttigieg had taken up his new post at the Malta Tourism Authority, Konrad Mizzi had already resigned as Minister. Although Konrad Mizzi had announced his resignation after a Cabinet meeting on the 26 November 2019 it is not clear if he had volunteered to step down or if he had been forced to go. He was reported as having said: “I felt it my duty – in the context of current political circumstances – to resign in loyalty to the people, the Labour Party and the Prime Minister.”

It would be reasonable to assume that Johann Buttigieg returned the favour from Konrad Mizzi when, on 9th December, he signed the contract appointing Konrad Mizzi as a consultant to the Authority – as one of his first decisions as CEO! However, this would not necessarily be a correct assumption. In fact, elsewhere in the press it has been opined that the decision to engage Konrad Mizzi as consultant was taken by Joseph Muscat himself, because after Konrad Mizzi’s resignation he was directly responsible for the Tourism Ministry.

As Chief Executive of the Malta Tourism Authority, Johann Buttigieg must shoulder substantial responsibility although it is most probable that he was acting on the instructions of Joseph Muscat. He should by now be aware that illegitimate (and unethical) superior orders can – and should be – ignored.

After Minister Julia Farrugia Portelli announced the rescinding of Konrad Mizzi’s contract she was asked to explain the reasons which justified such a revocation. She was very brief in her reply, saying that there were legal and ethical reasons that justified such a course of action. She was reluctant to state more in order to avoid prejudicing any legal action, should this result.

It is very interesting to note that the Honourable Minister has justified the revocation of the contract on ethical grounds. She is, of course, correct, although she chose not to point fingers. The point at issue then is who acted unethically?

I suggest that there are four persons who acted unethically in this specific case.

Irrespective of what they say, former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and his sidekick Konrad Mizzi resigned in disgrace for a number of reasons, including being the cause of reputational damage to the country through their involvement and/or failure to act on the Panama Papers debacle, as well as a direct result of the role of the Office of the Prime Minister in Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder: a role, the details of which are still emerging.

Joseph Muscat and Konrad Mizzi are at the top of the list of those who acted unethically as they set in motion the revolving recruitment mechanism as a result of which Konrad Mizzi was parachuted straight into the organisation for which he, as Minister, was politically responsible just two weeks earlier. This is unacceptable in any country that has a minimum degree of adherence to good governance: normally there would be a cooling-off period of some two to three years before such appointments are even considered.

Muscat and Mizzi tried to cash in on the fact that, the rules governing the ethical behaviour of holders of political office are still in their infancy. Dr George Hyzler, recently appointed by Parliament as the first Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, is still in the initial phase of his term and has yet to draft some of the appropriate rules.

The same applies to Chairman of the Malta Tourism Authority and Chief Executive Johann Buttigieg, who should not have allowed Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and his sidekick Konrad Mizzi to bully them into submission. The recruitment of Mizzi was kept secret as long as was possible due to the fact that, knowledge of its existence would undoubtedly have created further turmoil within the Labour Party, then in the process of electing a successor to the disgraced Joseph Muscat.

Where do we go from here? In my view those acting unethically should shoulder their responsibilities. I have thus requested the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life to investigate the role of Joseph Muscat, Konrad Mizzi, Gavin Gulia and Johann Buttigieg in the matter and consequently to recommend the necessary action required.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 2 February 2020

Pass tajjeb Julia: u issa?

Għada kif ħarġet l-aħbar li l-Ministeru tat-Turiżmu, wara li rċieva parir legali, ordna lill-Awtorità tat-Turiżmu biex il-kuntratt ta’ konsulenza ta’ Konrad Mizzi bi ħlas ta’ €80,000 fis-sena jkun annullat.

Pass tajjeb dan għal Julia Farrugia, l-Ministru ġdid tat-Turiżmu li sabet din il-ħatra ma wiċċha u ħadet passi. Ħatra li saret bil-moħbi fl-aħħar jiem tal-Gvern ta’ Joseph Muscat.

Li tħassar il-kuntratt hu pass tajjeb. Imma jeħtieġ ukoll li jittieħdu passi oħra.

Min ordna li Konrad Mizzi jkun ingaġġat bħala konsulent tal-Awtorità tat-Turiżmu? Ma naħsibx li dan sar minn wara dahar Joseph Muscat.

Bla dubju huma nvoluti ukoll Gavin Gulia Chairman tal-Awtorità tat-Turiżmu u Johann Buttigieg Chief Executive li ġie ngaġġat dan l-aħħar wara li Ian Borg ra kif għamel u ħeles minnu mill-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar. Il-kuntratt fil-fatt hu iffirmat minn Johann Buttigieg.

L-istorja m’għandhiex tieqaf hawn. Diġa saret talba biex il-Kumitat tal-Kontijiet Pubbliċi tal-Parlament jinvestiga.

Imma dan il-kaz hu ukoll wieħed dwar nuqqas ta’ mġieba etika u għandu jkun eżaminat mill-Kummissarju dwar l-Istandards fil-Ħajja Pubblika fil-konfront kemm ta’ Joseph Muscat kif ukoll ta’ Gavin Gulia u Johann Buttigieg.

Ser nagħmel talba lil Dr George Hyzler biex jinvestiga dan.

Zero waste : a 2050 target

Malta’s Waste Management Strategy for 2014-20 establishes the year 2050 as the one by which our society should achieve a zero waste target. In fact the first of four principles of Malta’s national waste policy is specifically: “to reduce waste and to prevent waste occurring, with a view to achieving a zero-waste society by 2050” (page 14 of Malta’s strategy).

It is pertinent to point out that the Zero Waste International Alliance has defined zero waste as follows: “Zero Waste is a goal that is both pragmatic and visionary, to guide people to emulate sustainable natural cycles, where all discarded materials are resources for others to use. Zero Waste means designing and managing products and processes to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover all resources and not burn or bury them. Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all discharges to land, water, or air that may be a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health.”

A Zero waste philosophy is thus a strategy and a set of practical tools seeking to eliminate waste and not just to manage it. The point at issue is how to go about reducing and eventually eliminating the waste that we generate.

This is basically a cultural change, waking up from our slumbers and realising that we live in a world where resources are finite. It is about time that we address our ecological deficit: from which there is no bale-out option.

There is one basic first step in the road towards zero waste which should be carefully planned and managed and this is a meticulous recycling strategy. Zero waste municipalities in Europe are continuously indicating that an 80 to 90 per cent recycling rate is achievable. The fact that Malta’s recycling rate is, at best, estimated at around 12 per cent, shows that there is room for substantial improvement: a seven-fold increase in Malta’s recycling rate.

How can this be brought about?

A first step would be to discard the apparently easy solutions which lead nowhere. Government’s proposed incineration policy, as a result of which 40 per cent of the waste generated will be burned, is a policy that seeks to manage waste and does away with the target of reducing and eventually eliminating its generation. The very fact that incineration is being proposed signifies a failure in the implementation of the waste management strategy just three years after its last revision, in 2014.

A second step would be to ensure consistency in waste policy. Malta’s Waste Management Strategy is aptly sub-titled ‘A Resource Management Approach’. By no stretch of the imagination can Malta’s proposed incineration policy be deemed to be consistent with such an approach. It is, in my view, just a panic reaction to the fact that there is no more space available for landfills.

The issue involved is very straightforward: can we deliver on our own target of a zero waste society by 2050? In planning to achieve this objective, each Minister has to be a Minister for the Environment, as each Ministry has a role in preventing or re-using the waste generated by the different economic activities. It is certainly a headache not only for Environment Minister José Herrera, but also for all the other Ministers, in particular Tourism Minister Konrad Mizzi and Minister for the Economy Chris Cardona.

In analysing waste management strategy targets achieved to date, it is not only Wasteserve that should be in the dock. The Minister responsible for the Economy has a duty to give account as to what measures and initiatives are in hand to develop the circular economy. It is the point where the paths of environment policy and economic policy cross, and rhetoric has to give precedence to results achieved or in the pipeline to be achieved.

Likewise, it is about time the Tourism Ministry seriously addresses the waste generated by hotels, bars and restaurants. This is an area that has been neglected for several years and is creating considerable difficulties in various parts of the Maltese islands, especially those along the coastline.

It is about time we realised that the implementation of an environment policy is not to be restricted to the corridors of the Environment Ministry: it is an activity that should be carried out by each and every Ministry.

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday: 26 November 2017

Il-latrini pubbliċi fil-Parlament

public convenience

Il-ħin allokat għall-mistoqsijiet parlamentari tal-bieraħ ġie użat kollu dwar il-latrini pubbliċi.

Il-Ministru tat-Turiżmu Edward Zammit Lewis mhux sodisfatt bil-kwalità ta’ servizz fil-latrini pubbliċi. Irid itejjeb il-kwalità tal-prodott tat-turiżmu. Ġustament iħares lejn is-servizz fil-latrini pubbliċi bħala wieħed importanti. Sa hawn Zammit Lewis m’hu jgħid xejn ħażin. Avolja jekk irid jgħid kollox għandu jgħid li, f’ħafna każi, s-servizz hu ferm aħjar milli kien fil-passat. Dan minkejja li l-Kunsilli m’għandhomx biżżejjed flus biex jimpjegaw latrine attendant kontinwu ma kull latrina pubblika, kemm għat-tindif meħtieġ kif ukoll għas-sorveljanza kontra l-ħela tal-ilma u l-vandaliżmu.

Meta bdew jagħafsuh biex ikun ftit iktar ċar Zammit Lewis qal li għad ma hemmx deċiżjonijiet. Imma qed ikun ikkunsidrat kif ikun involut is-settur privat f’dak li jissejjaħ PPP (private-public-partnership). Kif? Zammit Lewis qal li għadu qed jara l-options kollha. S’issa imma għad m’hemmx deċiżjonijiet. Imma l-Kunsilli Lokali ser ikunu involuti, qal il-Ministru. L-ewwel effettwati, skond il-Ministru Zammit Lewis ser ikunu dawk fiċ-ċentru tal-pajjiż.

Il-problema tal-latrini pubbliċi hi li l-Kunsilli Lokali huma mistennija li jagħtu servizz imma m’għandhomx il-flus biex jagħtu dan is-servizz. Hemm ukoll il-problema tal-vandaliżmu. Il-pagi huma l-ispiża l-kbira fil-każ tal-latrini pubbliċi, f’xi kazi (b’mod partikolari fis-sajf) hu meħtieġ il-presenza ta’ persuna (attendent) għal sittax-il siegħa kuljum jew iktar, jiġifieri tnejn min-nies għal sebgħat ijiem fil-ġimgħa ma’ kull latrina pubblika. Fil-prattika dan biss ifisser paga ta’ 4 persuni fis-sena full time ma kull latrina pubblika. Dan qabel ma biss tibda tikkunsidra spejjes oħra.

Li l-Gvern joħroġ b’inizjattiva ħalli jtejjeb il-kwalità tas-servizz ikun pass tajjeb dejjem sakemm ma jitfax iktar piz finanzjarju fuq il-Kunsilli Lokali.

Il-proposti tal-Gvern s’issa għadhom mhux magħrufa. Għax Zammit Lewis qagħad attent li ma jgħid xejn f’dan is-sens. Allura irridu nistennew u naraw.

It-taxxa fuq it-turiżmu


It-taxxa fuq it-turiżmu f’artiklu fit-Times tal-lum, il-Ministru tat-Turiżmu Edward Zammit Lewis isejħilha kontribuzzjoni ambjentali! Donnu jistħi juża’ l-kelma taxxa. M’hi kontribuzzjoni xejn għax ħadd m’hu ser jagħtiha voluntarjament.  L-istess bħall-eko-kontrubuzzjoni li kien introduċa George Pullicino fl-2004. It-tnejn issejħu kontribuzzjoni meta fil-fatt it-tnejn huma taxxa.

L-introduzzjoni ta’ din it-taxxa fuq it-turiżmu hu pass tajjeb.  Hi miżura li qed joħduha diversi pajjiżi biex permezz tat-turiżmu jinġabru fondi għat-titjib neċessarju biex il-prodott turistiku innifsu jkun dejjem aħjar. It-turiżmu għandu impatti mhux żgħar fuq l-ambjent. Kull turist iħalli warajh impatt ambjentali ta’ 50% iktar minn dawk li jħalli l-persuna residenti permanenti. Dan skond studju li kien sar f’Malta xi snin ilu.

Fl-2010 l-Gvern Malti ta’ dakinnhar ukoll kien ipprova jintroduċi miżura simili. Imma iffaċċjat b’resistenza mill-industrija tat-turiżmu kien bidel il-miżura f’taxxa alternattiva.

Id-dettalji ta’ din it-taxxa għadhom m’humiex ċari. Għadu mhux ċar, per eżempju, jekk din it-taxxa hiex ser tinġabar ukoll minn fuq akkomodazzjoni turistika apparti mil-lukandi. Jiġifieri minn fuq flats, farmhouses u vilel li jinkrew lit-turisti (kif ukoll lill-Maltin) li jippreferu din ix-xorta ta’ akkomodazzjoni flok kamra f’lukanda.

Id-diffikulta, ovvjament hi biex tinġabar. Hu faċli li tinġabar minn fuq il-lukandi. Mill-bqija diffiċli. L-akkomodazzjoni alternattiva hi waħda problematika għar-regolatur u għaldaqstant mhux ser tkun faċli li tinġabar, apparti minn fuq it-turiżmu li jagħmel użu mil-lukandi. Din hi problema li iffaċċjaw ukoll pajjiżi oħra, u aħna f’Malta m’aħniex eċċezzjoni.

It-taxxa proposta hi ta’ 50 ċenteżmi tal-euro kuljum, sa massimu ta’ €5. Żgħażagħ (u tfal) taħt it-18-il sena ser ikunu eżentati.

Hu stmat li matul l-2016 ser jinġabru €6 miljuni permezz ta’ din it-taxxa fuq it-turiżmu. Il-Gvern ser iżid ma dan l-ammont li ser ikun afdat f’idejn Fondazzjoni għall-Iżvilupp ta’ Żoni Turistiċi bl-iskop li jkun hemm ugrading, titjib u manutenzjoni ta’ żoni pubbliċi ewlenin. Din il-Fondazzjoni, skond id-diskors tal-budget, ser tinvolvi fiha lill-Assoċjazzjoni tal-Lukandi u Restoranti (MHRA), imma l-Kunsilli Lokali, għal darba oħra ma jissemmew imkien.

Ir-responsabbiltajiet li ser ikunu finanzjati b’din it-taxxa fuq it-turiżmu diġa huma (bil-liġi) assenjati bħala responsabbilta tal-Kunsilli Lokali li jixtiequ jaħdmu iktar, imma m’humiex jingħataw biżżejjed flus biex ikunu jistgħu jagħmlu xogħolhom. Issa għax instabu l-flus għal darba oħra l-Kunsilli Lokali ser ikunu injorati.

***Joseph u l-istilel tas-settur privat***

Joseph Muscat + MHRA

Qed isiru diversi laqgħat minn esponenti tal-Gvern mal-korpi kostitwiti bl-iskop li jiddiskutu miżuri li għandhom ikunu kkunsidrati fil-Budget li ġej, ġimgħatejn oħra.

F’laqgħa li l-Prim Ministru Joseph Muscat kellu l-bieraħ mal-MHRA (l-Assoċjazzjoni Maltija għal-Lukandi u r-Restoranti) il-Prim Ministru hu rappurtat mill-Malta Independent li qal li ma jistax ikollok lukanda ta’ sitt stilel imbagħad ambjent ta’ tlett stilel madwarha.

Inews ikkwota lill-Prim Ministru jgħid hekk: “meta jiżdiedu t-turisti donnu ż-żibel ma jinġabarx u din issa se tkun fuq l-aġenda”.

Billi kellu lil Winston Zahra (President tal-MHRA) quddiemu, u lil Edward Zammit Lewis Ministru tat-Turiżmu ħdejh kien ikun għaqli kieku l-Prim Ministru staqsihom ftit biex jgħidulu x’jagħmlu r-ristoranti bl-iskart li jiġġeneraw, primarjament fiż-żoni turistiċi.

Seta staqsihom jekk hux veru li dawn fil-liċenzja tagħhom li toħrog l-Awtorità Maltija tat-Turiżmu (MTA) għandhom kundizzjoni li teħtieġilhom li jkollhom kuntratt ma’ operatur privat tal-iskart (li jħallsuh huma) li jieħu ħsieb jiġbor l-iskart li huma jkunu ġġeneraw u jiddisponi minnu.

Dan l-obbligu li għandhom is-sidien tar-restoranti qiegħed jiġi onorat? 

Il-Ministru tat-Turiżmu naħseb li jaf li l-MTA f’diversi lokalitajiet m’hiex tinforza din il-kundizzjoni tal-liċenzja. Minflok  l-iskart iġġenerat qed jispiċċa fit-toroq, piz żejjed fuq il-Kunsilli Lokali. Tajjeb hekk Joseph? Dan m’huwiex servizz ta’ tlett stilel mis-settur privat. Għax l-anqas jikkwalifika għal stilla waħda.

Joseph jekk irid jista’ jdur dawra għall-għarrieda u jkun jista’ jara b’għajnejh. Forsi l-ħmar ma jibqax iwaħħal f’dembu. Imbagħad naraw min jara l-istilel.

Għax qabel ma jigglorifika lis-settur privat ikun aħjar kieku Joseph jara li dawn jerfgħu r-responsabbiltajiet tagħhom.




Ignoring residents and their local councils

strait street valletta 2


Government has published a consultation document dealing with the use of open public spaces by catering establishments, entitled Guidelines on Outdoor Catering Areas on Open Public Space : a holistic approach to creating an environment of comfort and safety.

This document was launched earlier this week at a press conference addressed by the Minister for Tourism Edward Zammit Lewis and the Parliamentary Secretary responsible for planning and simplification of administrative processes Michael Falzon.

The inter-Ministerial committee set up by government to draft the policy document was limited to representatives of the Ministry of the Interior, MEPA, Transport Malta, the Government Property Division, the Malta Tourism Authority and the Association of Hotels and Restaurants (MHRA). Representatives of the local councils were excluded from participating.

It seems that when the matter was being considered by Cabinet, the Minister for Local Councils Owen Bonnici was fast asleep as otherwise he would undoubtedly have drawn the attention of his colleagues that the Local Councils Act, in article 33, deems it a function of local councils “to advise and, where applicable, be consulted by, any authority empowered to take any decisions directly or indirectly affecting the Council and the residents it is responsible for”.

Surely the use of public open spaces by catering establishments is a matter which is of considerable interest to local councils as it affects both the councils and the residents they represent. Yet the government has a different opinion as representatives of local councils were not invited at the drawing board where the guidelines on the use of public open spaces by catering establishments were being drafted.

The guidelines introduce a one stop shop at MEPA, thereby eliminating the need to apply for around four other permits for the placing of tables and chairs in public open spaces. This would be a positive development if MEPA can take on board all the considerations which are normally an integral part of the four other application processes.

If the utilisation of public open spaces was limited to the squares in our towns and villages, I do not think that there would be any issue. There is sufficient space in such areas and using part of it for open air catering activities there would not be cause for concern.

However, problems will definitely arise in areas of mixed use, that is, areas where the ground floor is used commercially and the overlying areas are used as residences. This is a common occurrence in many of the localities where there is a high demand by the catering business for the utilisation of public open space. The guidelines, however, ignore the impacts which placing chairs and tables at street level could have on the residents in such areas, in particular those living in the floors immediately above ground level. Such impacts would primarily be the exposure of residents to secondary cigarette/tobacco smoke as well as noise and odours. The issue of noise will undoubtedly arise, in particular during siesta time, as well as late into the evenings while secondary smoke from cigarettes/tobacco as well as odours will be an ever present nuisance. Maybe if the local councils were not excluded from the inter-Ministerial Committee, these matters would have been taken into consideration.

In such instances it would be necessary to limit the placing of tables and chairs at such a distance from residences where impacts on residents from secondary smoke, noise and odours are insignificant: that is if there is sufficient space.

The guidelines establish that a passageway of 1.50 metres on pavements is to be reserved for pedestrians. In addition they establish that where a permit is requested to place chairs and tables outside third-party property, specific clearance in front of doors and windows is to be observed. Isn’t that thoughtful of the inter-Ministerial Committee? Instead of categorically excluding the placing of chairs and tables along the property of third parties it seeks to facilitate the creation of what would inevitably be a nuisance to the users of such a property. This, too, is the result of the lop-sided composition of the inter-Ministerial Committee.

Nor are parking spaces spared. The inter-Ministerial Committee makes provision in the proposed guidelines for the possibility that catering establishments can also make use of parking spaces for the placing of tables and chairs when other space is insufficient. The guidelines leave no stone unturned in ensuring that tables and chairs get priority, even though this is worded in terms that make it appear that it would be an exception.

Enforcement, as usual, will be another headache. We already have quite a number of cases in various localities where passageways are minimal or inexistent and pedestrians, excluded from walking along the pavement have to move along with the traffic, right in the middle of the road. At times this may prove quite difficult and dangerous, in particular for wheelchair users or in the case of parents with small children. Enforcement to date is practically inexistent and I do not think that matters will change much in this respect.

Unfortunately, MEPA is a repeat offender in ignoring the interests of the residential community when faced with all types of development. The guidelines on the use of public open space by catering establishments are thus more of the same.

While cars have taken over our roads, catering establishments will now be guided on how to take over our pavements and open spaces, parking included!

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 13 September 2015  

It-turiżmu: benefiċċji biss?

Malta Tourism Authority


Illum it-Tnejn, fil-Parlament ġew diskussi l-estimi tad-dħul u l-ħruġ tal-Awtorita’ Maltija tat-Turiżmu.

Bħalma aħna mdorrijin nisimgħu, sena wara l-oħra, smajna fuq records ta’ numri ta’ turisti li żaru Malta.  Matul l-2013, qalilna Edward Żammit Lewis, Ministru tat-Turiżmu, ġew f’Malta 1,500,000 turist, żieda ta’ 9.6% fuq l-2012. Dan kien ifisser nefqa ta’ biljun euro f’Malta. Dħul tajjeb għal Malta li jsostni eluf ta’ impiegi.

Ikun tajjeb ukoll iżda jekk f’diskussjoni ta’ din ix-xorta napprezzaw ukoll li t-turiżmu għandu impatt mhux żgħir fuq l-ambjent. Ras għal ras kull turist għandu impatt ambjentali 50% iktar minn residenti permanenti f’Malta.

Dan l-impatt ifisser li ras għal ras turist jikkonsma iktar ilma u iktar elettriku kuljum. Ifisser ukoll li jiġġenera iktar skart u iktar tniġġis. Ħuwa importanti li jsir sforz ikbar milli sar s’issa biex dan l-impatt jonqos.

Huwa xieraq li nirrikonoxxu li diġa saru sforzi kbar. Anke mil-lukandi infushom. Permezz tal-Malta Business Bureau u b’għajnuna mill-Unjoni Ewropeja qed jiġi indirizzat il-konsum tal-ilma. Bosta lukandi ħadu jew qed jieħdu passi. Diversi diġa naqqsu b’mod mhux żgħir il-konsum tagħhom tal-ilma. Tajjeb, għax b’inqas konsum ta’ ilma mill-industrija tat-turiżmu żdied il-qliegħ tal-industrija u tnaqqas impatt ambjentali.

Hemm bżonn inżidu l-isforz, mhux biss dwar l-ilma, iżda dwar l-oqsma l-oħra kollha ta’ impatti ambjentali.