Another fake consultation

Reading through the Green Paper entitled “Towards Cleaner Vehicles on Our Roads” it is evident that this consultation process is flawed. After being 4 years in the making, instead of proposing solutions it just asks questions which should have been answered by the Green Paper itself as part of the consultation process.

This is symptomatic of a government which has been continuously emitting conflicting signals on transport issues. The Green Paper recognises the obvious when it states that transport combustion emissions increased by 86 per cent over the period 1990-2018. The massive investment in unnecessary road infrastructure has been a major contributor in this respect, a point which is conveniently ignored by the Green Paper.

The proposed shift to cleaner vehicles on our roads is welcome, but on its own it is not sufficient. This measure will definitely reduce combustion emissions. It will however also shift the said emissions from our roads to the sources of the electrical energy used to electrify our roads. Knowing that government is planning to install a second interconnector to the Sicilian mainland for the supply of electricity it is clear that part of the emissions will be shifted 80 kilometres to the north, the rest to Delimara. It is still unclear how this will be reflected in the price we pay for electricity, as information on the matter is conveniently absent from the Green Paper.

The Green Paper rightly discusses the need to upgrade the skills of the technical personnel required in servicing and maintaining electric and hybrid vehicles. It also points towards the need for substantial investments in the infrastructure required particularly for charging points. However, it fails to address a number of points of controversy which require urgent resolution and should have been addressed through this consultation process.

The consumption of petrol and diesel is bound to decrease as a result of the drive towards the electrification of our roads. The rate of decrease of fuel consumption will depend on the manner in which the electrification exercise will proceed throughout the transition period. Why then has no moratorium been announced on the development and construction of new fuel stations? A number of controversial applications for fuel stations are still burdening the land use planning process when it should be crystal clear to all that in view of the electrification process, they will no longer be required. The consultation process is conveniently silent on the matter thereby encouraging unnecessary pressures on the planning process.

Simultaneously it is pertinent to point out that the sale of fuel contributes a substantial income to the exchequer which income will now slowly taper to near zero through the transition period. The Green Paper fails to volunteer information in this respect. How will this substantial income be substituted? Will the electrification process itself provide the substitute financial resources or will other areas of activity be tapped to make good? The amounts involved are substantial. In fact, the budgetary estimates for 2021 indicate a projected income of €154 million from excise duties on petroleum products. What are government plans for the substitution of this income? The Green Paper is once more completely silent on the matter.

The Green Paper refers to Low Emission Zones but it does not have the courage to make specific proposals. It is imperative that the transition period from now until the full electrification of our roads gradually adopts the identification of Low Emission Zones within which internal combustion engine vehicles will have a prohibited access. The Green Paper fails in this respect too.

The Green Paper refers to two studies which have been commissioned by the Cleaner Vehicles Commission on the electrification of our roads. These studies are not however available to inform this public consultation.

Notwithstanding having been announced four years ago, with ample time for preparation, this consultation process is deficient. It fails to address the basics: it fails to inform. It is a fake consultation.

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday : 20 June 2021

We need a Carbon Budget

Searching for the word “climate” through the 2021 Pre-Budget document published earlier this week entitled Towards a Sustainable Economy one finds the word three times: twice referring to the United Nations Agenda which has to be addressed by Malta as a prospective UN Security Council member, while a third reference is to policy documents under preparation in Malta. The word climate in the pre-budget document is not associated with any climate change policy implementation or action and its impact on the Maltese economy.

It is already five years since the Paris Climate Summit and its conclusions are still being “studied” in Malta. If we keep on procrastinating, achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 will be very difficult to attain.

When Parliament approved the Climate Action Act in 2015 it identified that one of the tools to be used in the politics of climate change was the formulation of a Low Carbon Development Strategy. Consultation on a Vision to develop such a strategy was carried out in 2017, but three years down the line the final policy document is nowhere in sight, even though the Minister for Climate Change Aaron Farrugia has indicated that it may be concluded towards the end of this year. 

A Low Carbon Development Strategy will identify those sectors which are of considerable relevance in developing a low carbon strategy. Some of them are major carbon emission contributors to be addressed. Other sectors are part of the solution as they provide alternative tools which serve to decouple the economy from intensive energy use, in the process reducing carbon emissions.

The Vision which was subject to public consultation three years ago identifies a number of sectors as areas for climate action, namely: enterprise, energy, transport, waste, water, agriculture, tourism, information and communication technologies (ICT) and finance.

The Low Carbon Development Strategy, when published, should address these areas of action. It would also be expected that such a strategy would also identify the manner in which we will be in a position to achieve our target of carbon neutrality. Such a strategy would also, for completeness be expected to be coupled with a carbon budget which would break down the general target into specific manageable objectives which could be achieved over a specific and reasonable timeframe.

At the Paris Climate Summit, together with all other countries, Malta made pledges to take action in order to lay the foundations for reducing climate impacts. If all the pledges made at Paris are honoured, however, we will still be very far off from achieving the target of not exceeding a two-degree Celsius temperature rise. Much more is required.

Unfortunately, Malta’s climate related policies are double faced. On one hand the Malta government publicly pledges action to address climate change. Simultaneously, however, it proceeds with massive road infrastructural projects which encourage more cars on our roads. On the other hand, plans for the electrification of our roads are apparently subject to an elephantine gestation period. In the meantime, car emissions compete with power generation emissions as Malta’s major contributor to climate change.

It is unfortunate that the Low Carbon Development Strategy and the associated Carbon Budget are taking too long to be formulated. It will take much longer to implement them as special interest groups will undoubtedly seek to protect their specific areas to the detriment of attaining our carbon-neutral objective.  

Malta should be at the forefront of climate change action. Parliament’s declaration recognising the existence of a climate emergency is not enough. Words must give way to action. As an island, Malta should be aware that a primary climate change challenge in the years to come will be a rising sea level as a result of which the coastline may recede inwards at a rate so far unknown. The coast, we may remember, is home to most of our maritime and tourism infrastructural facilities, all of which are under threat. Even residential areas close to the sea level will be impacted. This would include all sandy beaches and the residential/commercial areas at l-Għadira, Xemxija, Salini, Gzira, Msida, Sliema, Ta’ Xbiex, Pietà, Marsa, Marsaxlokk, Marsaskala, Birzebbuga, Xlendi, and Marsalforn. Impacts could also move towards inland low-lying areas such as Qormi.

If we take too long to bring our own house in order, it may be too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 13 September 2020

Ħames ħsibijiet


1. Ippjanar għall-użu tal-art

Tnax-il sena ilu meta l-pjani lokali kienu approvati mill-Ministru responsabbli mill-Ippjanar tal-Użu tal-Art, il-Parlament għadda biex ta l-approvazzjoni tiegħu biex meded kbar ta’ art fil-periferiji taz-zoni urbani tagħna jingħataw għall-bini. 12-il sena wara li l-Parlament approva l-ezerċiżżju ta’ razzjonalizzazzjoni xi residenti għadhom ma ndunawx kif għaddewhom biż-żmien. Xi drabi uħud mill-Membri Parlamentari li dakinnhar ivvutaw favur li art fl-ODZ issir tajba għall-bini, illum għandhom l-ardir li jkunu fuq quddiem jippuppaw sidirhom “f’appoġġ” għar-residenti li f’daqqa waħda jindunaw li d-dar tal-ġirien ser taqa’ u flokha tielgħa blokka appartamenti. Issa daqshekk xemx fuq il-pannelli li għadhom kemm ħallsu u stallaw ftit ilu!

Kważi kuljum nirċievi emails mingħand residenti li jkunu jixtiequ joġġezzjionaw għal żvilupp propost f’diversi lokalitajiet. Jiċċassaw meta ninfurmaw li ż-żmien għall-oġġezzjonijiet għalaq madwar 12-il sena ilu. L-parti l-kbira tar-residenti ma jiftakrux l-ismijiet tal-membri parlamentari li għaddewhom biż-żmien.

F’dawn l-aħħar ġimgħat kelli każijiet fil-Mellieħa, il-Mosta, Marsaxlokk, Wied il-Għajn u H’Attard. U għad hemm ħafna iktar.

2. Il-bdil fil-klima u l-karozzi tal-elettriku

Studju ippubblikat nhar il-Ġimgħa fil-Journal Nature Communications jiġbed l-attenzjoni li jekk wieħed iqabbel l-emmissjonijiet attwali ta’ diversi pajjiżi ma’ dak li wegħdu f’Pariġi sentejn ilu fil-laqgħa dwar it-tibdil fil-klima, għadna ħafna lura biex jintlaħqu l-miri stabiliti.

Il-wegħdiet faċli biex isiru imma sfortunatament mhux faċli biex jinżammu.

It-trasport hu illum il-kontribut ewlieni ta’ Malta għat-tibdil fil-klima. Madwar sena ilu l-Prim Ministru Muscat kien qal li mhux ‘il-bogħod li jieqfu l-karozzi li jaħdmu bil-petrol u d-disil mit-toroq tagħna biex flokhom nibdew nużaw karozzi li jaħdmu bl-elettriku. Għadna nistennew lill-Gvern iħabbar il-pjan tiegħu.

3. 17 Black

L-aħbar mil-Latvja dwar l-ismijiet assoċjati mal-kumpanija 17 Black u ċ-ċaqlieq ta’ flus maħmuġin madwar id-dinja ikomplu jagħtu l-kulur lill-istorja li ma tispiċċa qatt dwar il-ħasil tal-flus. Tajjeb li niftakru f’dik iż-żjara uffiċjali f’Baku f’Diċembru 2014 meta l-ebda uffiċjal taċ-ċivil jew ġurnalista ma kien preżenti. Dakinnhar staqsejna għalfejn? Possibilment it-tweġiba illum qegħda tiċċassa lejna.

4. L-istrateġija ta’ Bedingfield

Nhar il-ġimgħa kienet l-aħħar ġurnata għall-konsultazzjoni pubblika dwar il-Kottonera li jidher li qegħda f’idejn Glenn Bedingfield. Qed jipproponu t-twaqqif ta’ fondazzjoni biex timplimenta l-istrateġija. Donnu li Glenn ftit jimpurtah mill-kunsilli lokali jew mill-kunsill tar-reġjun li s-sens komun jgħidlek li għandhom ikunu huma nkarigati bl-implementazzjoni. Forsi Glenn għadu ma ndunax li hemm “konsultazzjoni pubblika” oħra għaddejja, din id-darba dwar il-gvern lokali u għadha għaddejja sa l-aħħar ta’ Novembru. X’għala biebu!

5. L-appell dwar id-dB

L-appell kontra l-permess ta’ żvilupp li nħareġ lid-dB għat-tħarbit tas-sit tal-ITS f’ Pembroke jibda nhar it-Tlieta. It-Tribunal ta’ Reviżjoni għall-Ambjent u l-Ippjanar (il-Bord tal-appell) irid jibda biex jiddeċiedu dwar it-talba li għandu quddiemu minn dawk li qed jopponu l-permess biex ix-xogħol li diġa beda jieqaf immedjatament u jibqa’ hekk wieqaf sa meta jinqata’ l-appell. Wara it-Tribunal jibda jikkonsidra sottomissjonijiet fuq kull waħda mit-18-il raġuni li hemm biex il-permess jitħassar: ibda mill-kunflitt ta’ interess tal-aġent tal-propjetà membru tal-bord li japprova l-permessi tal-bini kif ukoll bir-regoli kollha li nkisru meta kien approvat dan il-permess ta’ żvilupp.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum: Il-Ħadd 18 ta’ Novembru 2018


Five random thoughts

1. Land Use Planning

Twelve years ago, when the local plans were approved by the then Minister responsible for land use planning, Parliament proceeded to approve the inclusion of substantial stretches of land on the periphery of most of our urban areas within the limits of permissible development. Twelve years after the approval of the rationalisation exercise by Parliament, some residents are still not aware of the manner in which they have been compromised. At times they are taken advantage of by Members of Parliament who had supported the extension of the development boundaries but now feel duty bound to “support” residents who suddenly realise that their neighbour’s house is being pulled down and in its stead a block of flats will arise, blocking out the sun off their PVCs which they have just paid for!

I receive emails almost daily from residents wishing to object to proposals for development in various localities. They are speechless when I inform them that the time for objections elapsed some 12 years ago! Most residents do not remember the names of the Members of Parliament who shafted them in 2006.

I have in the past weeks dealt with cases in Mellieħa, Mosta, Marsaxlokk, Marsaskala and Attard and many more are pending.

2. Climate Change and electrification

A study published last Friday in the Journal Nature Communications points out that if one compares q country’s actual emissions with the pledges made at the Paris Climate Change meeting two years ago, we are still very far from achieving the objectives set.
Unfortunately, pledges are easy to make and difficult to keep.

Transport is currently Malta’s major contribution to climate change. Over one year ago, Premier Muscat had stated that petrol and diesel-powered cars should be driven off our roads and substituted by electric cars. We are still waiting for government to announce its detailed plans.

3. 17 Black

The revelation from Latvia of the names associated with 17 Black and the movement of dirty money around the globe adds more spice to the never-ending saga of money laundering. It may be pertinent to point out to that official visit at Baku in December 2014 at which no civil servant or journalist was present. Then we asked why. Possibly now we have the answer.

4. Bedingfield and his strategy

Last Friday was the closing date on the ongoing public consultation on Cottonera piloted by Glenn Bedingfield. It is being proposed to set up a foundation to eventually implement this strategy. Apparently Glenn has no qualms in shafting the local councils and the regional council in the area which logically should be the ones entrusted with implementation. Maybe Glenn has not yet realised that another “public consultation” on local government is currently in hand up till 30 November. Who cares?

5. The dB appeal

The appeal against the development permit issued for the dB mega-mess at Pembroke will commence next Tuesday. High on the list on considerations to be addressed by the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (the appeals board) will be the request by those opposing this development to stop works immediately, pending the outcome of the appeal. Then the Tribunal will commence considering submissions on the eighteen reasons which justify the invalidation of the development permit – ranging from the obvious conflict of interest of the estate agent dishing out development permits to a blatant disregard of planning policy.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 18 November 2018

Il-bidla fil-klima hi magħna


Nhar il-Ġimgħa li għaddiet rappreżentanti ta’ iktar minn 170 pajjiż, Malta inkluża, inġabru fil-kwartieri ġenerali tal-Ġnus Magħquda fi New York biex jiffirmaw il-ftehim dwar il-klima li intlaħaq fi tmiem is-sena ġewwa Pariġi. Dan il-ftehim għandu jfisser li hemm qbil li kull pajjiż ser jikkontribwixxi lejn soluzzjoni ta’ din il-problema.

Hemm qbil biex jittieħdu l-passi kollha meħtieġa ħalli t-temperatura globali ma togħliex iktar minn bejn 1.5oC  u 2oC fuq it-temperatura globali, kif din kienet fil-bidu tal-perjodu industrijali. Biex dan isir jeħtieġ li jonqsu l-emissjonijiet li qed joriġinaw mill-attivitajiet tal-bniedem u li qed jinġabru fl-atmosfera u jsaħħnu d-dinja. Ewlieni fost dawn il-gassijiet hemm id-diossidju tal-karbonju (CO2) li prinċipalment joriġina mill-ħruq ta’ żjut fossili li nużaw biex niġġeneraw l-elettriku kif ukoll mill-petrol u mid-diesel li jintużaw fil-karozzi u inġenji oħra.

Anke Malta ser tfittex li tnaqqas l-impatti tagħha fuq il-klima u dan billi jkollha politika sostenibbli dwar it-trasport, l-enerġija u l-agrikoltura, fost oħrajn. Irridu nindirizzaw l-impatti tal-klima fuq il-bijodiversità, fuq is-saħħa, fuq it-turiżmu, fuq l-ilma, fuq l-agrikoltura kif ukoll fuq l-infrastruttura marittima.

Kemm is-sena li għaddiet kif ukoll l-ewwel tlett xhur ta’ din is-sena kienu fost l-iktar sħan fl-istorja. It-temp qed jitħawwad. L-istaġuni qed jiġġebbdu u jinbidlu. L-istaġuni tax-xita inbidlu għal kollox b’mod li qed issir ħsara kbira lill-agrikultura kif ukoll lill-ħażna tal-ilma li hi tant essenzjali għal kull forma ta’ ħajja. It-temperatura li qed togħla qed iddewweb is-silġ fil-poli u fuq il-muntanji f’diversi partijiet tad-dinja bil-konsegwenza li l-livell tal-baħar qed jogħla u ser jogħla iktar jekk ma’ jittieħdux miżuri biex inrazznu l-għoli tat-temperatura.

Irridu innaqqsu l-impatti tagħna fuq il-klima bħala pajjiż: irridu innaqqsu l-emissjonijiet kif ukoll il-ħela ta’ riżorsi bħall-ilma u l-elettriku. Jeħtieġilna ukoll li narmu inqas skart kif ukoll li nirriċiklaw iktar. Jekk nagħmlu iktar użu mit-trasport pubbliku ukoll nistgħu inkunu ta’ għajnuna kbira biex Malta tnaqqas il-kontribut tagħha għall-bidla fil-klima.

Irridu nifhmu li l-bidla fil-klima qed tħarbat il-ħajja ta’ kulħadd. Qed tipperikola r-riżorsi li s’issa tipprovdilna b’xejn in-natura. Dan ifisser li filwaqt li kulħadd jintlaqat, l-iktar li jintlaqtu huma l-fqar f’kull rokna tad-dinja. Għax it-tibdil fil-klima iżid il-faqar kullimkien. Dan diġa beda jseħħ.

Il-klima hi parti mill-ġid komuni, hi ta’ kulħadd u hi għal kulħadd. Hu għalhekk ukoll li għandna l-obbligu li kull wieħed minna jagħti sehmu biex l-impatti ta’ pajjiżna jonqsu. Il-ftit impatti tagħna huma importanti daqs il-ħafna impatti ta’ ħaddieħor. Mela niftħu ftit għajnejna għall-ħsara kbira li diġa saret u nagħtu sehemna biex din tonqos. Ma baqax żmien x’jintilef għax il-bidla fil-klima diġa qegħda magħna.

Din is-sena bħala riżultat tal-bidla fil-klima ftit li xejn kellna xita f’Malta. L-effett fuqna ser jinħass l-iktar fuq l-agrikultura u l-ħażniet tal-ilma. Pajjiżi oħra sofrew l-għargħar li kaxkar kull ma sab.

Dawn huma l-effetti li qed jidhru u li diġa huma magħna. Nagħmlu l-parti tagħna biex flimkien ma dak li jirnexxielhom jagħmlu pajjiżi oħra innaqqsu dawn l-impatti u b’hekk titjieb il-qagħda ta’ kulħadd. Għax il-klima hi ġid komuni tal-umanità kollha: hi ta’ kulħadd u hi għal kulħadd.

Snippets from the EGP Manifesto: (13) Green Transport



Aviation and road transport are major sources of greenhouse gases, air pollution and noise. The current volume of fossil fuels used for the transport sector not only has a strongly negative impact on public health and the environment but also makes the EU dependent on energy imports and exposed to rising prices. We need to shift to safer and less environmentally-damaging modes like sustainable waterways, cycling, public-collective transport and rail. Special emphasis needs to be put on fair competition between different modes of transport. A European railway network should therefore close missing links on both regional and long-distance connections, in a way that urban and regional agglomerations can easily be reached. Existing cross-border rail connections must be prioritised over roads and aviation, especially for the movement of goods. Improving the energy efficiency of cars helps cut the fuel bills of European citizens and improves air quality. We also want to spur innovation by making electric bicycles, tramways and trains, electric cars, all based on renewable sources, more attractive options. (EGP 2014 Manifesto section entitled  : Priority for Green Transport.)

Learning to use chopsticks


We have been told that it is most worrying that China could acquire a share in our energy corporation. It is worrying, we are told, due to the strategic importance of the sector.

We tend to forget that Malta has plenty of foreign investments in other strategic sectors. Another one wouldn’t change much would it?

Our only airport is run by Austrians.

Gambling has been left to  Greek Intralot.  Banking is heavily influenced by global HSBC ironically originating from Hong Kong, the tip of the Chinese mainland.

The public  transport fiasco has an Anglo-German fingerprint through Arriva.

LPG Gas is controlled by Italians through GASCO.

The Freeport is controlled by a Franco-Turkish alliance for the next 65 years. (CMA-CGM and Yildirim Group)

When its Austria, Greece, Anglo-German interests, Italian investments, Franco -Turkish controls, or global HSBC then its globalisation.

The Chinese interest is part of the same process.

Obviously the details of the memorandum of understanding signed earlier this week are not yet known. Hence a proper discussion would have to wait until such details are known. There will surely be positive and negative impacts. China stands to gain. Whether Malta’s potential gains are adequate is still to be seen as we have only been fed titbits of information.

China obviously stands to gain through establishing a stronger foothold in Malta and within the EU.  Whether it will be similarly positive for Malta is still to be seen.

Some Chinese companies are world class. They provide stiff competition to international firms such as Lahmeyer International the one time consultants to the Malta Resources Authority and to Enemalta Corporation. Some of these Chinese companies have reached the same grade in World Bank blacklists !

We have been there before.

It may turn out not to be so difficult to learn to use chopsticks after all !

TEN-T : The Għadira Nodes


published Saturday 27 December 2008

by Carmel Cacopardo


Two important points have to be borne in mind while searching for a solution to upgrade the Ten-T (Trans-European Transport Network) road link at Ghadira Bay, Mellieha.

Firstly, all identified solutions will have an environmental impact. Secondly, in order that the public discussion be fruitful all information must be freely available.

The stakeholders are not just NGOs and specific economic operators. The whole community is the stakeholder. Stakeholders require information not just from the perceived interested parties but more so from the public authorities that are vested with authority to defend the community’s interests.

A number of reports have been made public. Some have been quoted selectively. Others are still under wraps.

BCEOM (French engineering consultants), in its 2004 report entitled Feasibility And Environmental Impact Studies For Transport Infrastructure Projects In Malta – Final Feasibility Study Report and AIS Environmental Limited, in its 2005 report entitled Proposed Review Of Ghadira Road Options, identify the upgrading of the existing road along the beach as the preferred option.[vide also 1 and 2]

Since then a number of proposals have been publicised. These revolve around two possibilities: the retention of the existing road with modifications or the construction of an alternative road to the south of the Nature Reserve and the Danish Village.

Preliminary appraisal of environmental impacts has been drawn up and on its basis the authorities have issued opinions that have not yet been made public. These indicate the detailed studies that have yet to be carried out in order to arrive at a definite decision.

In particular, it is to be noted that the AIS report dated November 2005 states (pages 2 and 3) that BCEOM had rejected the tunnel design beyond the Danish Village, which would have reclassified the beach front route as a local road.

These proposals were rejected by BCEOM on the basis of “excessive and unpredictable costs”. In addition, the AIS report emphasises that “Mepa had rejected the tunnel options on environmental grounds because the area in question is classified as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC)”.

The AIS report further states that subsequent to the above-indicated Mepa rejection, ADT reassessed the situation and proposed three options, two focusing on the existing road and the third being a new road incorporating a tunnel and bridge through the garigue (an SAC) south of the Danish Village, which, like the SAC-protected Nature Reserve, has been officially approved by the EU and forms part of Natura 2000.

It is within this context that Mepa has requested a “holistic preliminary assessment of the impacts arising from the various options that ADT is now considering”. Mepa has requested a number of studies related to beach dynamics, ecology, agriculture, geology, geomorphology and hydrology, archaeology and others. These studies were requested way back in 2005 and none has to date seen the light of day, notwithstanding that everyone seems to be in a hurry! These studies, if properly carried out, are of fundamental importance in determining the manner in which the Ghadira Ten-T link is to proceed, if at all!

Various statements have been made in the past weeks. The most conspicuous were those related to the sandy beach. It is by now clear that these have originated (without scientific justification) from a consultant commissioned by one of the economic operators in Ghadira Bay and were intended to reinforce his proposal for a beach concession as a result of a possible re-routing of the Ghadira road.

Within this context it was highly unethical for the Ministry of Transport to invite the said consultant to sit alongside the ministry’s officials in a recent meeting with NGOs and the press. The ministry’s subsequent declaration that it would oppose proposals for beach concessions in the area can only be interpreted as an attempt to correct its ethical short-sightedness!

A further important statement was made last week by nature itself. The sea level temporarily rose to the road level, thereby reinforcing arguments already brought forward that the existing road during the winter months is doubling up as a coastal defence to the Nature Reserve, which, being sited on former salt pans is partly below sea-level.

At this point in the debate, matters are slightly less nebulous than they were in the beginning. The declaration by the Minister for the Environment that all the required studies will be carried out is welcome.

However, such a declaration risks being viewed as a cheap attempt at damage control unless an explanation is forthcoming as to why these studies have not yet been finalised notwithstanding that they were requested by Mepa way back in 2005!

It is clear that, until recently, some thought that these studies could be dispensed with only to realise at the 11th hour that the environmental lobby is vigilant and will keep insisting that the government, through its various agencies, should shoulder its responsibilities!

Dak il-bicycle




Mela issa jekk tixtri bicycle ser tieħu lura 15.25% ta’ dak li tħallas. Din hi miżura tajba intenzjonata biex tħajjar l-użu tal-bicycle għal distanzi qosra. Miżura posittiva.


Imma l-bicycle fejn sr ikun ipparkjat ? Ma hawnx bicycle racks biżżejjed. Safejn naf jien ġew istallati bicycle racks f’B’Kara (fi żmien li kien kunsillier Mario Mallia f’isem Alternattiva Demokratika) u f’H’Attard (bl-inizzjattiva ta’ Ralph Cassar – kunsillier ieħor ta’ Alternattiva).


Fit-toroq l-anqas ma għandna sigurta’ biżżejjed għax ftit li xejn għandna cycle lanes. Uħud minn dawk li saru jieqfu ħesrem.


Il-miżura ta’ refużjoni ta’ 15.25% tal-prezz ta’ bicycle hi waħda tajba. Imma hemm ħtieġa ta’ ħafna iktar.