Insaħħu l-Ewropa tal-valuri

Il-proġett Ewropew hu mibni fuq il-valuri. Fil-manifest elettorali għall-kampanja li għaddiet, Alternattiva Demokratika għidna hekk: “Aħna favur il-proġett Ewropew. Irridu naħdmu iktar biex ma nħallux li l-kritika ġustifikata tal-ħidma tal-istituzzjonijiet Ewropej tkun konvertita f’sentiment anti-Ewropew. Ma rridux Ewropa ta’ ħitan nazzjonalisti. Dawn il-ħitan għandhom jitwaqqgħu biex flokhom inkomplu nibnu l-pontijiet ħalli jissaħħaħ dejjem iktar il-kisba storika kbira li hi ta’ benefiċju għall-Ewropa magħquda b’ħafna modi.”

Irridu Ewropa ta’ solidarjetà. Mhux biss solidarjetà li ġustament nippretendu li issir magħna bħala pajjiż kull meta dan ikun meħtieġ, imma fuq kollox is-solidarjetà li rridu nkunu kapaċi nagħmlu aħna ukoll bħala pajjiż ma ħaddieħor, f’kull ħaġa li għandna l-kapaċità għal dan. Għax is-solidarjetà mhiex one-way.

Irridu nibqgħu dejjem immexxu ‘l-quddiem politika ta’ tama mhux politika ta’ mibgħeda. Politika ta’ tama lil min hu ppersegwitat u maħrub minn pajjiżu. Solidarjetà ma min bata u għadu qiegħed ibati. Il-politika tal-ażil imħaddna minn Alternattiva Demokratika hi ibbażata fuq is-solidarjetà li hi fost il-valuri bażiċi mħaddna mill-poplu Malti tul is-snin. Is-solidarjetà hi parti mill-ġenetika ta’ kull Malti veru.

Imma fl-istess ħin bi dritt, bħala Maltin, nippretendu li l-Unjoni Ewropeja tagħmel ħafna iktar biex il-piż li ntefa fuqna mill-ġografija nkunu nistgħu nerfgħuh bi sħab mal-bqija tal-Unjoni. Hu essenzjali li l-istati membri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja fuq il-fruntiera ikollhom l-għajnuna kontinwa li jeħtieġu biex nibqgħu nkunu nistgħu naqdu l-missjoni tagħna ta’ servizz lill-umanità f’nofs il-baħar Mediterran. Kieku l-Unjoni Ewropea,kollettivament, kapaċi tħaddem is-solidarjetà mal-immigranti maħrubin u ippersegwitati daqs dik li ntweriet fil-konfront tal-banek f’diffikulta xi snin ilu, is-sitwazzjoni tkun bla dubju ferm aħjar għal kulħadd.

Tul din il-kampanja elettorali emfasizzajna ukoll il-valur tas-sussidjarjetà, jiġifieri li l-ħidma meħtieġa issir dejjem l-iktar viċin possibli ta’ dawk milquta minnha. L-Unjoni Ewropeja diġa bdiet tapplika dan il-prinċipju. Imma hemm ħtieġa ta’ impenn ferm ikbar biex dan mhux biss iħalli l-frott imma ukoll biex kull ċittadin Ewropew ikun konxju li dan fil-fatt qiegħed isir.

Emfasizzajna ukoll fuq il-ħtieġa tal-applikazzjoni tal-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà f’Malta bejn il-Gvern Ċentrali u l-Kunsilli Lokali. Huwa essenzjali li l-Gvern ma jibqax jittratta lill-Kunsilli Lokali qieshom il-front desk tal-customer care tiegħu. Ir-rwol tal-Kunsilli Lokali m’huwiex biss ċentrali biex jingħataw is-servizzi bażiċi lill-komunità imma ukoll biex tinfirex u tissaħħah dejjem iktar it-tħaddim tad-demokrazija fil-pajjiiż.

Tkellimna ukoll dwar is-sostenibilità, jiġifieri dwar il-ħtieġa li naħsbu iktar fit-tul fil-ħidma kollha tagħna. Fuq kemm hu meħtieġ li nindirizzaw l-impatti ambjentali u soċjali tal-politika ekonomika, saħansitra mill-istadju tal-ippjanar tagħha. Dan jgħodd fl-oqsma kollha. Kieku dan kellu jsir sewwa, kemm pajjiżna kif ukoll l-Unjoni Ewropeja innifisha jkunu ferm aħjar.

Din kienet kampanja elettorali li fiha Alternattiva Demokratika kellha 11-il kandidatura (2 għall-Parlament Ewropew u 9 għall-Kunsilli Lokali): b’taħlita tajba bejn demm ġdid u esperjenza. Fiduċjuż minn riżultati raġjonevoli mhux biss għax ħdimna għalihom imma fuq kollox għax huma ukoll meħtieġa biex inkunu nistgħu nibqgħu nagħtu l-kontribut utli tagħna lill-pajjiż.

Ikun xi jkun ir-riżultat Alternattiva Demokratika ser tibqa’ hawn għas-servizz tal-pajjiż.

 

Ippubblikat fuq Illum: Il-Ħadd 26 ta’ Mejju 2019

Advertisements

Strengthening a Europe of values

The European project is founded on values.
In the electoral manifesto for yesterday’s electoral cycle, Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party, emphasised: “We stand for the European project. We will work to push back against and isolate those who try to convert valid criticism of deficiencies and mistakes into an anti-European, extremist and xenophobic rollback. We say ‘No’ to a Europe of nationalisms. These dividing walls should be demolished and substituted by bridges, further strengthening the European unification process, a great historical achievement which benefits a united Europe in multiple ways.”

We want a Europe that practices solidarity and not just the solidarity we expect to receive when, as a country, we face serious difficulties; solidarity is not a one-way street. We need to further ingrain in our present-day public ethic the fact that solidarity also signifies helping others.

The politics of hope should continuously override the politics of hate: giving hope to those fleeing their persecutors. Our solidarity should be a beacon of hope in the centre of the Mediterranean. The politics of asylum endorsed by Alternattiva Demokratika –The Green Party is solidarity-based – solidarity being one of the basic values of Maltese society. Solidarity is part of the genetic makeup of all true Maltese.

We are justified in expecting, as a right, that the European Union does much more to help us shoulder the burden that geography has placed on our shoulders. It is essential that, along with all EU frontier states, we receive continuous assistance so that we can fulfil our duty in the service of humanity right in the centre of the Mediterranean Sea. If the EU was collectively capable of implementing solidarity towards migrants in the same way in which it baled out the banking system some years back, all EU countries would be much better off.

Throughout this campaign ,we have also placed an emphasis on subsidiarity. This is also a basic EU value, the implementation of which signifies that social and political issues are dealt with as closely as possible to those affected. The EU has already incorporated this value as an integral part of EU law. It now requires more determination to not only facilitate its timely implementation but also to ensure that every European citizen is adequately informed as to how this is being carried out.

We have also emphasised the need to apply the subsidiarity principle in Malta in the developing relationship between central government and local councils. It is essential that local councils are no longer considered as government’s customer-care front desk. Local councils are not only crucial when it comes to delivering basic services to the community: they are also essential to ensure that the democratic process is strengthened.

We also spoke at length about the need to embed sustainability in our politics: taking a long-term view of political decision-taking. It is essential that the social and environmental impact of all economic policies are scrutinised, as early as at the drawing-board stage. This applies to all sectors. Once applied, the politics of sustainability will transform every corner of the EU into a better place in which to live!

In this electoral campaign, Alternattiva Demokratika –The Green Party, has fielded 11 candidatures: two for the European Parliament and nine for Local Councils, a mixture of new blood and experience. We expect reasonable results for which we have not only striven but which are also essential in order that we proceed with our political work.
Irrespective of the results, Alternattiva Demokratika will still be around, as it has always been, in the service of all.

published on Malta Independent on Sunday – 26 May 2019

Is-sussidjarjetà fil-Kostituzzjoni

 

Nhar il-Ġimgħa delegazzjoni ta’ Alternattiva Demokratika iltaqgħet ma’ Silvio Parnis, Segretarju Parlamentari għall-Gvern Lokali, biex miegħu niddiskutu l-White Paper ippubblikata mill-Gvern dwar ir-riforma tal-kunsilli lokali.

Waqt id-diskussjoni għaddejna lil Silvio Parnis l-ideat tagħna dwar din il-White Paper. Għamilna tmien proposti b’dik ewlenija tiffoka dwar il-ħtieġa li jkun aċċettat u implimentat il-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà. Il-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà jeħtieġ li jifforma parti mill-kostituzzjoni biex iservi ta’ linja gwida għall-amminstrazzjoni pubblika tal-pajjiż u allura jħares b’qawwa l-ħidma tal-Gvern lokali u reġjonali.

It-trattati Ewropej diġa għamlu dan il-pass meta addottaw il-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà bħala prinċipju bażiku li jirregola r-relazzjonijiet kumplessi bejn l-istituzzjonijiet Ewropej u l-istati membri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Il-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà hu l-iktar żviluppat fl-istati hekk imsejħa Ġermaniċi tal-Ewropa u ċjoè l-Ġermanja, l-Awstrija u l-Iżvizzera, liema pajjiżi għandhom qafas ta’ Gvern lokali u reġjonali b’saħħtu u bħala riżultat ta’ dan ir-responsabbiltajiet u l-poteri huma mifruxa.

L-amministrazzjoni pubblika teħtieġ li tkun l-iktar viċin possibli taċ-ċittadin: min jamministra u jiddeċiedi għandu jkun l-iktar qrib possibli ta’ min hu effettwat mid-deċiżjonijiet. L-eċċezzjonijiet għandhom ikunu rari u altru milli ġustifikati. Jacques Delors, li kien President tal-Kummissjoni Ewropeja, hu ikkwota li qal li : is-sussidjarjetà ma tillimitax biss l-intervent ta’ l-ogħla awtorità f’dak li kull persuna jew komunità tista’ tiddeċiedi hi innifisha, imma hi ukoll dover ta’ din l-istess awtorità biex taġixxi b’mod li lil din il-persuna jew komunità tgħinhom biex iwettqu l-ħolm tagħhom.”

Dan jitfa dawl fuq żewġ aspetti tas-sussidjarjetà. L-ewwel li ħlief f’każijiet eċċezzjonali l-ogħla awtorità ma jindaħalx fejn ma jesgħahiex fil-ħidma ta’ awtoritajiet oħra taħtha. It-tieni : l-obbligu li tgħin biex tinkoraġixxi l-kisba tal-awtonomija.

Alternattiva Demokratika qed tipproponi li l-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà jkun aċċettat bħala prinċipju kostituzzjonali li jagħti gwida lill-amministrazzjoni pubblika u dan bħala l-ewwel pass għat-twettieq ta’ proposta radikali oħra: id-diċentralizzazzjoni tal-ħidma operattiva tal-amministrazzjoni pubblika lill-awtoritajiet lokali u reġjonali, bil-Gvern iżomm f’idejh il-funzjonijiet regolatorji. Dan jista’ faċilment jitwettaq fuq il-mudell ta’ Għawdex bid-differenza li jitmexxew minn politiku reġjonali flok minn politiku nazzjonali.

Id-dokument bil-proposti ppubblikat minn Alternattiva Demokratika jittratta diversi temi oħrajn bħalissa ċentrali fid-dibattitu dwar ir-riforma proposta tal-gvern lokali u reġjonali.

Is-servizz ta’ kull kunsillier lokali għandu jkun apprezzat, mhux biss is-servizz li jagħti s-Sindku! Il-proposta li l-uffiċċju tas-Sindku jkun wieħed full-time ma hemmx ħtieġa tagħha. Hemm diversi raġunijiet għal dan. Bħala riżultat ta’ din il-proposta dawk kollha li ma jistgħux jieqfu mill-impieg normali tagħhom ikunu esklużi milli joffru s-servizz tagħhom fil-kariga ta’ Sindku. Dan billi tali proposta teffettwa b’mod qawwi l-possibilità li huma jirrintegraw ruħhom fl-impieg meta jintemmilhom il-perjodu tal-ħatra tagħhom. Bla dubju jinħolqu ukoll kunflitti bla bżonn mas-Segretarju Eżekuttiv li l-liġi illum tikkunsidrah bħala l-uffiċjal amministrattiv ewlieni tal-kunsill lokali.

Flok ma tiffoka fuq is-Sindku r-riforma għandha tinkoraġixxi iktar il-ħidma kolleġjali fil-lokalitajiet tagħna b’mod li twassal għal sehem iktar attiv ta’ kull kunsillier fit-tmexxija tal-lokalitajiet. Il-proposta li qed jagħmel il-Gvern li kull kunsillier jingħata responsabbiltajiet hi tajba. Saret diġa minn Alternattiva Demokratika fil-konsultazzjoni pubblika dwar il-kunsilli lokali li saret fl-2008. Waħedha imma mhiex biżżejjed. Trid tkun segwita minn pass ieħor: li kull kunsillier jingħata onorarju raġjonevoli. Din m’għandiex tkun materja riżervata għas-Sindku.

Il-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà għandu japplika ukoll biex materji ambjentali jkunu regolati minn dawk li l-iktar jeffettwawhom mill-viċin. Li jkunu nvoluti sewwa l-kunsilli lokali u reġjonali f’dawn id-deċiżjonijiet għandu jwassal għal deċiżjonijiet aħjar minn dawk li għandna illum. Imma dwar dan, darb’oħra.

Il-konsultazzjoni pubblika dwar ir-riforma tal-gvern lokali u reġjonali issa ġiet fit-tmiem. Nistennew il-posizzjoni li ser jieħu l-Gvern dwar in-numru mhux żgħir ta’ proposti li saru. Nittama li jittieħdu bis-serjetà.

ippubblikat fuq Illum : 2 ta’ Diċembru 2018

Subsidiarity in the Constitution

 

On Friday, a delegation from Alternattiva Demokratika met Parliamentary Secretary for Local Government Silvio Parnis to discuss the White Paper published by the government concerning the reform of local government.

During the discussion, we handed Mr Silvio Parnis our response to the White Paper, a response that contains eight proposals – the central one focusing on the need to accept and implement the principle of subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity needs to be constitutionally entrenched in order to serve as a guiding light to the country’s public administration and, consequently, protect local and regional government.

The European treaties have already entrenched the principle of subsidiarity as a basic tenet, regulating the complex relationship between European institutions and EU member states.

The principle of subsidiarity, mostly developed in the so-called Germanic states in Europe- namely Germany, Austria and Switzerland – which states have a robust local and regional arrangement, as a result of which responsibilities and the corresponding authority is spread.

Public administration should be as close to the citizen as possible: those administering and making decisions should be as close as possible to those who feel the impact of such decisions. Departure from this basic rule should only occur for reasons of absolute necessity. Former President of the European Commission Jacques Delors is quoted as having stated that subsidiarity is not only a limit on the intervention of a higher authority in the affairs of a person or community that can act itself, it is also a duty of this authority to act in relation to that person or community in such a way as to give it the means to fulfil itself.

This brings to the fore two aspects of subsidiarity. Firstly, that of non-interference by the higher authority in the workings of the lower authority, except in exceptional cases and, secondly, the duty to help – that is help that encourages autonomy.

Alternattiva Demokratika is proposing that the principle of subsidiarity be accepted as a guiding constitutional principle for the public administration as a first step to implementing another radical proposal: the decentralisation of the operational functions of public administration to the regions and local authorities with government retaining the regulatory functions. This can be easily carried out on the Gozo model, although with a regional elected politician replacing the current national politician in charge.

The document published by Alternattiva Demokratika deals with various other matters currently being debated as part of the proposed local and regional government reform.

The service of all elected local councillors should be appreciated, not just that rendered by the Mayor! The proposal to transform the office of Mayor in our localities into a full-time role is uncalled for and a number of reasons come to mind. It would automatically exclude all those who cannot take a sabbatical from their employment as it would have a long-term negative effect on their ability to adequately reintegrate when their mayoral term of office comes to an end. It would also create unnecessary conflict with the Executive Secretary, currently defined by the Local Council legislation as the chief executive of Local Councils.

Instead of singling out the Mayor, the local council reform should encourage a more collegial leadership, with all councillors being more actively involved in the running of the localities. The proposal in the White Paper to codify the duty to assign responsibilities to each elected councillor – a proposal first made by Alternattiva Demokratika and highlighted during the public consultation of 2008 on local council reform, is a good first step. It has to be followed by ensuring that all councillors receive a reasonable honorarium: this should not be a reserved for the Mayor alone.

The principle of subsidiarity should also be applied to regulating environmental issues closer to base. Involving regional and local councils in these decisions could lead to much better decisions than those we currently face. But more about that next time.

The public consultation has now been concluded. We await the reaction of the government to the large number of proposals made. Hopefully, these proposals will be seriously considered.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 2 December 2018

Subsidiarity and loyalty

malta passport

The Prime Minister has a generational transformation in sight which he wants to bankroll with the monies generated by his sale of citizenship scheme. His supporters see traitors everywhere as they cannot stomach any form of criticism.

Does any EU member state have the right to introduce and implement a sale of citizenship scheme?  Government spokesmen have repeatedly stated that the Malta Government has been advised that it is in line with EU legislation. In line with the subsidiarity principle, nationality issues, we were told, are the sole and exclusive competence of EU member states.

No one is contesting that nationality issues are a national competence. In fact even Commissioner Viviene Reding made this amply clear. There is however much more to it than state competence. There is the duty to be loyal to the Union and other member states. Article 4.3 of the European Union Treaty explains this as the principle of sincere cooperation, also referred to as the loyalty principle: loyalty, that is, towards the other European Union member states.

Government has opted to milk citizenship in order to generate finance so as to be in a position to implement its electoral programme. It has excluded taxation as an option. Moreover it has reduced income tax as part of its electoral strategy in order to outwit the former government, knowing full well that this necessitated alternative financial avenues. Never did it place its plans to put citizenship on sale before the electorate for its consideration. Ethically the Labour Party cannot claim to have an electoral mandate on the matter.

The local political debate has revealed diametrically opposed positions. Government’s position is dictated by its strategy of requiring cash in order to finance its political initiatives. Time is of essence in its strategy. It cannot afford to wait for would-be investors to take initiatives of their choice. There is no direct link between the prospective citizen and the manner in which the monies he pays are “invested”. It is in fact an exercise of selling citizenship with a commitment to use the proceeds in a specific manner. The funds generated are hypothecated. A residential criterion has so far been ruled out, most probably,  as this would only serve as a delaying factor. It would delay the flow of the monies required depending on how long the residential criterion runs.

The warning shot fired by the EU Parliament is not to be discarded as the EU Parliament is the only democratically elected EU institution. Nor is Commissioner Reding’s statement  one that could be ignored. Reding has stated that:

While I am not calling for the Commission to receive legal power to determine what constitutes nationality or the rules granting it, the Commission nevertheless expects that Member States act in full awareness of the consequences of their decisions.

Our debate today shows the growing importance of these questions in a European Union where national decisions are in many instances not neutral vis-à-vis other Member States and the EU as a whole. It is a fact that the principle of sincere cooperation, which is inscribed in the EU Treaties (Article 4.3 of the Treaty on European Union), should lead Member States to take account of the impact of decisions in the field of nationality on other Member States and the Union as a whole.”

Clearly the competence of member states on issues of citizenship is not absolute. Given its impacts on all the other members of the Union in areas of national security, freedom of movement in the Schengen Area, rights to residence and employment, it stands to reason that both the EU as well as member states require consultation which apparently was not carried out.

The capping of the citizenship scheme at 1,800 passports for sale is certainly not enough. A residential condition of reasonable length is also  required as an additional and essential element. This would however be a sticking point as whilst it could render the proposed scheme less un-acceptable and in line with some of the practices elsewhere, it may fail to deliver what the Maltese Government requires on time.

It is with this in mind that the Greens in Malta have time and again called on Government to suspend the implementation of the scheme and concurrently to initiate a dialogue with Brussels. The problem at an EU level may eventually be resolved around the negotiating table. This would result in less reputational damage for Malta. A meeting called between the EU Commision and the Malta Government seems to be imminent. Hopefully matters will take a positive turn.

That would leave the political issue to be solved locally, either in Parliament or at the ballot box through a public consultation. The Prime Minister has already indicated that he is willing to submit the issue to a national consultation.  It is the decent way forward, part of our learning curve as a nation.

published in The Times of Malta, Saturday January 25, 2014

L-iskema taċ-Ċittadinanza ta’ Joseph Muscat: il-kobba tkompli titħabbel

Malta+EU

Il-kobba tal-iskema tal-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza qed tkompli titħabbel.

Il-Gvern iddeċieda. Ikkonsulta ruħu, prinċipalment wara li kien ġja ħa d-deċiżjonijiet.

Il-ħsieb li għandu l-Gvern hu wieħed ċar ħafna. Għandu bżonn il-flus biex jiffinanzja il-programm politiku tiegħu. Wara li rabat idejh li ma jżidx taxxi, kif ukoll wara li daħal fi sqaq billi naqqas it-taxxa tad-dħul meta l-pajjiż ma kienx ippreparat għal dan, ma kienx baqa’ wisq fejn idur. Iddeċieda li s-sors tal-finanzjament meħtieġ ser ikun id-dħul mill-bejgħ ta’ madwar 1,800 passaport. Dħul li hu ikkalkulat li jammonta għal madwar €1.20 biljun.

L-argumenti politiċi f’Malta instemgħu għal darba, tnejn u iktar. Kulħadd qal tiegħu, iżda l-Gvern wara li bidel xi dettalji tal-iskema, jidhirlu li għandu jibqa’ għaddej.

Mhux ċar jekk dan il-ħsieb dwar il-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza żviluppax mill-elezzjoni lil hawn jew inkella jekk ġiex ikkristalllizzat qabel l-elezzjoni ġenerali. Saru kitbiet diġa f’dan is-sens u hemm min spekula li l-pjan sar qabel l-elezzjoni, iżda nżamm mistur. Qed tiċċirkula l-ideja li l-Partit Laburista (u per konsegwenza l-Gvern iffurmat minnu) qiesu obbligat li jimplimenta din l-iskema. Qiesu jrid jonora xi ftehim milħuq. S’issa dan għadu mhux ċar għax ovvjament ħadd m’hu ser jikxef x’ġara, għalmenu għalissa.

Issa bdiet tiżviluppa fażi oħra tal-istorja. Il-mistoqsija hi dwar jekk il-Gvern Malti (u kwlaunkwe Gvern ieħor fl-Unjoni Ewropeja) għandux id-dritt assolut li jiddeċiedi dwar iċ-ċittadinanza. Minn dak li qalet il-Kummissarju Viviane Reding nhar il-Ħamis hi u tiftaħ id-dibattitu fil-Parlament Ewropew l-Unjoni Ewropeja hi tal-fehma li d-dritt li tkun irregolata ċ-ċittadinanza m’huwiex dritt assolut tal-istati membri. Reding qalet hekk:

While I am not calling for the Commission to receive legal power to determine what constitutes nationality or the rules granting it, the Commission nevertheless expects that Member States act in full awareness of the consequences of their decisions.

Our debate today shows the growing importance of these questions in a European Union where national decisions are in many instances not neutral vis-à-vis other Member States and the EU as a whole. It is a fact that the principle of sincere cooperation, which is inscribed in the EU Treaties (Article 4.3 of the Treaty on European Union), should lead Member States to take account of the impact of decisions in the field of nationality on other Member States and the Union as a whole.”

Fi ftit kliem il-Kummissarju Reding qed tgħid li f’dak li nagħmlu bħala pajjiż irridu ta’ bil-fors nagħtu każ tal-impatti fuq il-pajjiżi l-oħra membri tal-Unjoni. Hi tirreferi għall-artiklu 4.3 tat-trattat dwar l-Unjoni u speċifikament dwar il-prinċipju ta’ kooperazzjoni sinċiera, xi drabi imsejjaħ ukoll il-prinċipju ta’ lejalta’. Dan kollu jfisser ħaġa waħda biss: li għandna d-dritt li niddeċiedu kif irridu sakemm ma neffettwaw lil ħadd. Jekk id-deċiżjoni tagħna bħala pajjiż teffettwa lil ħaddieħor għandna l-obbligu li nikkonsultaw. Iktar ma hu kbir l-impatt iktar irridu nikkonsultaw u allura iktar hu diffiċli li nikkonkludu kif irridu.

Iktar ċari minn hekk l-affarijiet ma jistgħux ikunu!

Issa hawn min qed isemmi skemi f’pajjiżi oħra li jixxiebħu mal-iskema tal-Gvern Malti. Euroactiv.com   iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa jirreferi għal dokument iċċirkulat fi Strasbourg mill-Gvern Malti li fih jirreferi għal skemi f’pajjiżi oħra dwar ċittadinanza : “Cyprus, Austria, Belgium and Portugal singled out” jgħidilna l-Euroactiv.com. L-iskemi l-oħra huma differenti, ghax prinċipalment huma ibbażati fuq residenza flimkien ma investiment sostanzjali. Tnejn mill-pajjiżi imsemmija (Ċipru u l-Portugall) għandhom ukoll problemi finanzjarji kbar.

S’issa jidher li l-Unjoni Ewropeja ma ikkummentatx dwar dan kollu imma jidher li issa ser tieħu passi. Il-każ ta’ Malta hu l-iktar sfaċċat imma l-każi l-oħra jixxiebħu u probabbilment li l-Unjoni  tikkummenta dwarhom ukoll.

Dan hu l-pass li jmiss. Minn kif tkellmet il-Kummissarju Reding jidher li d-diskusjsoni interna saret u l-ideat huma ċari. Ħames xhur oħra tiġi fi tmiemha l-ħajja tal-Kummissjuni preżenti u allura nistenna li fil-ġimgħat li ġejjin (ferm qabel ma jinbiegħ l-ewwel passaport),  inkunu nafu x’ser tagħmel il-Kummissjoni.

Il-Gvern jidher li ma kienx ippreparat għal dak li ġej. Kuntrarjament għal dak li qed jingħad il-vot tal-Parlament Ewropew għandu sinfikat kbir. Mhux biss huwa dikjarazzjoni politika qawwja. Imma jiftaħ għajnejn Muscat li l-unika appoġġ li għandu huwa ta’ politiċi bħal Marine Le Pen!

Le Pen

The Citizenship debate: a case of being trapped ?

trap

The issue of citizenship has been rightly described as being one of the areas which are reserved for the member states of the European Union. It logically follows that Malta (and every other European state) has the right to act. This line of thought is also reinforced by the principle of subsidiarity.

No one contests this except that it is not the end of the story.

Viviane Reding, EU Justice Commissioner has placed the matter in its proper perspective by pointing out that EU member states are also bound by the principle of sincere cooperation enshrined in article 4.3 of the Treaty of the European Union. This principle is also known as the loyalty principle.

In the Citizenship debate Malta is apparently entrapped between the subsidiarity principle and the loyalty principle. The former gives it the right to act. The latter points towards the duty to cooperate.

This is the warning announced loud and clear yesterday by EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding in the European Parliament.

Its about time that Prime Minister Joseph Muscat realizes the extent of the mess created. Time to start thinking Joe!

Within limits

the earth

The EU Commission has just published a draft of its Seventh Environmental Action Programme (7th EAP) covering up to 2020 which draft is entitled “Living well, within the limits of our planet”.

The draft which is open for public consultation aims “to step up the contribution of environment policy to the transition towards a resource-efficient, low-carbon economy in which natural capital is protected and enhanced, and the health and well-being of citizens is safeguarded.”

It is a programme which is based on the principle of subsidiarity meaning that decisions and action are to be taken as close as possible to those impacted. Some at the level of Member States, others at an EU level.

This draft EAP is based on three basic principles, namely: the polluter pays principle, the precautionary principle and the principle of rectification of pollution at source.

Its objectives are nine in number and include the protection of natural capital, resource efficiency, the attainment of a competitive low-carbon econony, enhancing the sustainability of the EU’s cities and  increasing the EU’s effectiveness in confronting regional and global environmental challenges.

Launching the draft EAP Environment Commissioner Janez Potočnik said: “The new Action Programme sets out the path for Europe to become a place where people live in a safe and healthy natural environment, where economic progress is based on a sustainable, green economy and where ecological resilience has been achieved.”

Climate Action Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said: “We cannot wait until the economic crisis is over before we tackle the resources, environmental and climate crises. We must address all these at the same time and so include climate and environmental concerns into all our policies. This strategy gives businesses and politicians the long-term view we very much need for making the transition to a sustainable, low-carbon society in Europe.”

The basic message and direction of the 7th EAP are contained in its title: ensuring an adequate standard of living (living well) but at the same time being conscious that there are limits to the resources available.

All our actions must be within “the limits of our planet”.  As I have repeatedly stated on this blog, examining our policies in Malta will reveal that we are still off target in many areas.  An environmental consciousness is developing at at fast rate, but unfortunately this is not matched with appropriate government action.

originally published at di-ve.com on 7 December 2012

The Nature of Green Politics

published on September 13, 2008

 

On being elected leader of the Greens in England and Wales last week, MEP Caroline Lucas stated: “There is a huge number of people out there who want to hear our message and we want to get better at getting it across. I want to get our message out about social justice. Everyone knows we are the party of the environment. What fewer people know is that if you are looking for the real progressive force in British politics today, it is the Green party”.

During the March 2008 general election, the PN took on board most of AD’s environmental policies. The MLP is now taking on board AD’s campaign on civil rights: divorce, gay rights, local council voting at age 16. AD’s campaign on rent reform has borne fruit. A consensus seems to be developing around AD’s electoral proposal on the energy surcharge: having a low or no charge for basic use and a high charge for excessive users.

An impressive contribution by a political party which has not yet made it to Parliament!

It is to early to state whether the PN and/or the MLP are trying to be greener than the greens. The emerging interest of the PN and the MLP in Green politics is positive as, in fact, this is coalition building by the back door!

It is to be borne in mind that Green parties are not restricted to environmental issues although, as stated by Ms Lucas, the environment is that area of politics with which Greens are mostly associated.

The Charter of The Global Greens, approved in Canberra in 2001, in fact identifies six principles forming the basis of Green politics: ecological wisdom, social justice, participatory democracy, non-violence, sustainability and respect for diversity. Viewed together, they form the basis of Green politics. All six are enshrined in the policy positions taken locally by AD.

Humankind is part of the natural world. We must respect all the other species forming part of this world. All forms of life are to be valued as all belong to the same natural world. This signifies that we must learn to live within the ecological and resource limits of planet earth and that we must ensure fulfilling the basic duty to respect biodiversity and life-support systems. Where we have little or no knowledge we must be cautious and tread carefully, thereby ensuring that we do not prejudice present and future generations. Basic to the achievement of social justice is the equitable distribution of resources. Social and environmental justice are thus intertwined.

Green parties the world over are firm believers in subsidiarity. AD will by the time of publication of this article have made public its proposals for a reform of local government. AD will argue for a strengthening of local government in Malta through devolution of additional responsibilities, clearer funding rules, Green tendering procedures at a local level and the need to introduce a referendum to decide on development projects having a significant impact on the locality.

The Greens respect diversity. Diversity of opinion. Ethical pluralism. Diversity in gender orientation. This has to be reflected in everyday politics. Hence, the Greens stand up against homophobia and support the right of gays and lesbians to be treated as equal persons of our community to which they too contribute through their daily toil.

The Greens favour divorce in contrast to those who believe in the theocratic powers of the state of imposing the beliefs of a section of the community on the rest. Those who believe in the indissolubility of marriage have a right to freely practise their beliefs. However, they have no right to impose their beliefs on the rest of the country. The state in Malta is still theocratic in this respect. It is about time that the winds of change open up the doors of ethical pluralism. Divorce has been recognised in Malta since 1975 but only for those who have the financial means to proceed to a foreign jurisdiction.

The effects of the March 2008 electoral campaign will take some time to sink into the psyche of the Maltese voter. It is not just about electoral promises which will not be fulfilled. Nor about scandals such as the Mistra one or the reversal of dubious pre-electoral decisions such as that on the development at Transfiguration Avenue in Lija. Voters are realising that the major parties avoided issues in March but subsequently had to face them. The shipyards debacle is a case in point wherein government intransigence had to give way to a civil society insistence on dialogue. Common sense eventually prevailed.

In the months ahead, the Greens in Malta will continue to face the issues and present to the public the progressive options which lie ahead.

Sustainable Localities & Regionalisation

published on 21 June 2008

 

by Carmel Cacopardo

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

To what extent are our localities sustainable ? This issue was brought up in pre-budget public discussions organised by the Ministry of Finance. The idea was floated as to what extent is it desirable to attract business to non-traditional localities in view of the fact that in 2007 six localities (Valletta, Sliema, Birkirkara, Mosta, St Paul’s Bay and Victoria) attracted 30 per cent of the 56,811 enterprise units functioning within these shores.

It was stated that the benefits of spreading the enterprise units (existing and new ones) in non-traditional areas would include the reduction of travelling time between home and work. This may also, however, shift traffic congestion depending on the type of enterprise involved, the resulting intensity of activity and the localities affected. A need for infrastructural improvements could build up in the newly-identified areas relative to road network, supply of water and electrical power as well as waste disposal. Dependent on the type of enterprise attracted, the friction between competing land uses would also be brought closer to a larger number of residences, possibly squeezing out residents in the process.

The discussion as to what makes a locality sustainable is healthy as it focuses on the maxim “think global, act local”, signifying that, while environmental impacts are being felt at a global (or regional) level, they are, however, created at a local level where remedial action should be taken.

Localities in other countries address sustainability at a local level through implementing what is known as Local Agenda 21. As a result of the Earth Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 the United Nations approved a document entitled Agenda 21. A Blueprint For Action For Global Sustainable Development Into The 21st Century.

In this document the issues to be addressed in order to assist in the transition from the existing mess to a more sustainable state of affairs are explained in 40 sections, section 28 addressing the role of local authorities. It is stated that “Because so many of the problems and solutions being addressed by Agenda 21 have their roots in local activities, the participation and cooperation of local authorities will be a determining factor in fulfilling its objectives”.

The experience of local authorities in other countries provides many examples. It highlights the difficulty created by size and, consequently, points to the question as to whether in Malta we require another layer of democratic institutions, at regional level, to which a number of responsibilities could be devolved: some currently pertaining to the national government, others to local authorities. This would be in addition to local councils, complementing their functions and, thereby, reinforcing the devolution of public administration.

Regionalisation has already been referred to in the past months as one of the possible solutions to the management of waste on the island.

This argument cropped up when addressing the issue as to whether the Sant’Antnin recycling plant at Marsascala should process all the solid waste generated on the island or whether it should be one of a number still to be determined. Within that context the proposal was made that the management of waste should be regionalised thereby applying the proximity principle to waste management: that is managing the waste generated as close as possible to its source.

Regionalising waste management would create a more visible link between cause and effect, thereby contributing to a more effective management of waste in these islands. The regional authority would assume the role of the operator, with the central government taking on the role of the regulator.

Subsidiarity would also be given a realistic opportunity to succeed as the difficulties encountered by some local councils due to a lack of economies of scale could be effectively tackled in most if not in all cases.

A proposal for the identification of the regions is already indirectly available. This is contained in the seven Mepa Local Plans, namely: the Grand Harbour Region, the Southern Region, the Central Region, the North West Region, the North Harbour Region, the Marsaxlokk Bay Region, Gozo and Comino.

Regional government could devolve responsibility for agriculture, education, land use planning (local plan implementation), projects of a regional importance, the administration of regional sports complexes, regional health centres, inter- and intra-regional transport and social security from national government. Local government could shed responsibility for waste management, the cleaning of non urban areas and the maintenance and management of beaches, which could be a regional responsibility.

The sustainability of our localities is intrinsically linked to their further democratisation. Creating an additional democratic layer and assigning specific responsibilities thereto would help in the amelioration of the running of this country. It would increase accountability as well as ensure more value for the taxpayer’s money.