Climate change governance and political incompetence

It has been announced that an Authority on Climate Change will be set up by government. This  has apparently been approved by Cabinet, earlier this week. No further details have so far been released.

It is not at all clear whether this authority will be expected to take charge of the action required on a national level in order to mitigate the impacts of climate change, or else, whether it will take the lead in the initiatives required to adapt to climate change.

Currently available on the website of the Ministry responsible for Climate Change one can peruse a draft document dated September 2023 and entitled Draft Energy and Climate Plan 2021-2030. As far as I am aware this document is still a draft. A definite version has apparently not been published yet notwithstanding that it should have been in effect 3 years ago! This draft document lays down national objectives relative to energy policy within the context of the climate change debate.

There is no Climate Change Adaptation Strategy available on the Ministry’s website. Some years ago (May 2012) a National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy was adopted and published, but apparently this has not been updated. It could, most probably, have been discarded; however, no information is available on the matter. Perusing my copy of the said strategy, I recollect that it was a reasonable first effort and was supplemented by an extensive 164-page report drawn up by the then Climate Change Committee for Adaptation. These documents were drawn up after extensive public consultation.

While energy issues are foremost in any Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, we need to go in considerable detail on other equally important aspects, such as the impacts of climate change on agriculture, water resources, health, civil protection, land use planning, tourism, coastal settlements, protection of the coastal infrastructure as well as biodiversity and the marine environment.

The debate on water resources has been ongoing and various policy initiatives have addressed the matter over the years. I am not sure as to what has been done by the Agriculture Ministry or the Health Ministry, but at the end of the day it is those same Ministries which need to initiate, implement and monitor the required action in their areas of responsibility.

Similarly, the Tourism Ministry seems clueless on climate change impacts on the industry. I have yet to come across a serious assessment of climate change on tourism in the Maltese islands and in particular on the potential havoc which tourism infrastructure will have to face as a result of an inevitable sea level rise.

What about inbuilding climate change considerations in land use planning policy and design guidelines? The 15-minute city initiative in Paris and elsewhere specifically addresses climate change in an urban policy context. Yet the Planning Authority in Malta is not bothered at all.

On the other hand, we need to realise that there have been various valid proposals over the years which have been discarded by government. One specific example which comes to mind is the proposal in the National Transport Master Plan which has pointed out the need to embark on private vehicle restraint.

The fact that to date we have an out-of-date Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and no effective coordination at Ministerial level on climate change impacts across all areas, signifies a failure of the Climate Change Ministry to implement its basic political brief over the years.

This is where the proposed Climate Change Authority comes in. It will most probably be considered essential to fill the coordination gap created by incompetence at the political level over the years.

The Ministry responsible for Climate Change specifically exists to coordinate, across government, issues of climate change through the various Ministries. This coordination has, unfortunately, over the years been inexistent. Hence the proposed solution to setup an authority to fill in the gap.

Climate change governance, over the years, has been characterised by political incompetence. The creation of an authority will just serve to shift the blame.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 14 January 2024

Rainwater down the drain

(file photo by author dated 4 October 2018: overflowing sewer at Archbishop Gonzi Square Kalkara)

We have just experienced the driest October in living memory. This is not a new experience. In the past few years, the climate has changed substantially. We are experiencing longer periods of drought and then suddenly we are faced with a storm and floods which wreak havoc all along their path.

After heavy rainfall most of our streets are flooded. The question which seeks a reasonable answer is: why is it that when it rains, so much water is flowing in our streets?

It has been 143 years since our laws imposed the duty to have water cisterns in our buildings.

How come that our regulatory authorities keep ignoring this blatant waste of a natural resource, provided by nature free of charge?

These same authorities which continuously speak about sustainability have proven themselves incapable of managing a natural resource. As a result, a substantial part of it goes to waste into the sea, either directly or else as a result of being filtered through the urban wastewater treatment plants, also referred to as sewage purification plants. Then, after having disposed of the purified wastewater into the sea we recover the same water through desalination plants for our use. In the process we incur substantial costs which are mostly avoidable. This is anything but sustainable!

Unfortunately, a substantial amount of rainwater incident on our roofs, in many instances, ends up in our streets or else in the public sewers instead of being collected in mandatory rainwater cisterns. In a number of cases these rainwater cisterns are either too small or else inexistent!

It is no wonder that our streets are flooded whenever it rains!

In addition, the rainwater ends up overloading our urban wastewater treatment plants which use a considerable amount of energy to produce treated water (called new water) or else to be dumped into the sea. 

Two authorities are responsible for this mess.

The main culprit is the Planning Authority (and its predecessors) which in many cases failed to identify and halt development which did not have provision for rainwater harvesting.

An additional culprit is the Water Services Corporation (WSC). Over the years, the Water Services Corporation (WSC) has taken over responsibility for the management of the public sewers from the former Drainage Department. This responsibility includes authorising the owners of newly- constructed properties to connect the drains of these properties with the public sewer. Is the WSC verifying that it is only the drains that are connected and, in particular, that rainwater pipes are not connected to the public sewer too? The obvious answer is provided by our streets on a rainy day. Clearly, no one is bothering to check what is connected to the public sewer.

Last year, government had embarked on a consultation on stormwater management. In the consultation document entitled Green Stormwater Infrastructure Guidance Manual we were informed that only 36 per cent of dwellings have a water cistern. Compliance with rainwater harvesting regulations, we were then informed, varied from 80 per cent in the case of villas to 4 per cent in the case of apartment blocks. On a geographic basic, Gozo had a 25 per cent compliance!

Millions of euros of public funds, local and EU funds, have been utilised in useless projects. The incompetent authorities have employed many to manage the resource. We have many “managers” but no results. If you seek a proof take a look at our streets during a rainwater storm. You will have all the answers you require.

Our forefathers had no authorities to monitor rainwater harvesting. They had no managers to enforce compliance! They had common sense which led them to understand nature and to use natural resources respectfully.

If we are to solve the problems that we have created over the years we need to rediscover our forefathers’ skills. Making peace with nature and appreciating its free gifts would be a good start.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 26 November 2023

Vacant properties: an investment or a launderette?

The publication of the 2021 Census Report on the characteristics of existing residential property once, more focuses the spotlight on the urban sprawl and in particular on the substantial number of vacant or under-utilised dwellings available in these islands.

On the day of the Census, the existence of 297,304 dwellings was recorded. Of these 81,613 were grouped as either vacant or else as being dwellings having a seasonal or secondary use. It works out at 27.5 per cent of the housing stock which at a national level is under-utilised. This varies regionally from a 22.1 per cent low, in the Western region, to a 45 per cent high in Gozo! From a 15.5 per cent low at Santa Luċija Malta to a 66.8 per cent high at Iż-Zebbuġ Gozo, which locality includes the seaside resort of Marsalforn.

While the Marsalforn numbers are most probably, primarily, a reflection of the predominantly seasonal accommodation in the locality, the overall numbers are still a cause for concern. The situation gets progressively worse.

The total number of vacant or under-utilised dwellings, 81,613, is equivalent to 6 times the size of residential Sliema or 8 times the size of residential B’Kara or 9 times that of residential Mosta. Given the small size of the country these numbers are substantial. They indicate the strain on both the environment as well as the public purse which is resulting from over-development.  These under-utilised dwellings are served with the required infrastructural services:  roads, electricity, public sewers and water services at a substantial public expense, which could have been more beneficially used in other areas where existing dwellings are actually in use, continuously!

The reasons for existing residential property being vacant or only being used occasionally are various. One cannot generalise. The census itself, in fact, identifies around 6,000 residential units as being in a shell state on the date of the Census.

There are several issues which should be considered and acted upon. Hopefully they will not be once more ignored.

With over 80,000 vacant or under-utilised properties, what sense does it make to continue dishing out development permits for large scale developments which keep adding to the stock of vacant properties? One of the major contributors to the creation of this mess is undoubtedly the land use planning rationalisation exercise, which in 2006 added one million square metres to the development zone. These are currently being developed.

With over 80,000 vacant or partially used properties it makes no sense to have a waiting list at the Housing Authority for those seeking alternative accommodation. The Housing Authority should tap the existing housing stock, rather than add to it, in order to address its waiting list immediately. The current projects of the Housing Authority are a waste of resources when such a large number of properties are available. This is bad governance of the worst kind.

A third consideration is to tax long-term vacant properties. It does not make any environmental sense to develop land (including agricultural land) and subsequently to keep the developed property vacant. Nor does it make economic sense to invest so much without seeking to recover economic benefits in the form of rent. Those who persist in keeping their properties unused in the long term should pay a vacant property tax which would in part compensate the public exchequer for the expenditure incurred in creating the ghost towns made up of these 81,613 vacant or under-utilised properties.

Taxing long-term vacant properties could encourage their being placed on the market, to the benefit of all. As a result, they would possibly avoid the tax altogether! The tax would have achieved its purpose in encouraging the use of all existing properties. It would have achieved its purpose of causing a behavioural change. This is the objective of most environmental taxes.

There is another issue: that of money laundering through property investment. Since Malta made it to the grey list of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) a number of years ago, some attention is being paid to the property launderette, as both Estate Agents as well as Notaries are carrying out some form of due diligence on property which is being sold. It is not unheard of for a property sale not materialising if there is doubt on the source of funds invested or being invested.  Investigating properly unexplained sources of wealth would contribute substantially not only to cleaning up the country but also in addressing the stock of vacant properties.

The use of property to launder illicit gains is not a new phenomenon. Regulatory initiatives in this respect are however still in their infancy.

The primary conclusion from this Census is a clear message to the Planning Authority to get its house in order. Why build so much to keep the resulting residential units vacant? It is a question we have been asking for years. Unfortunately, they are not bothered to answer!

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 10 September 2023

Planning for climate change

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission has recently published a study entitled “Regional Impact of Climate Change on European tourism demand”. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the EU policymaking process.

This JRC technical study examines the potential impact of climate change on tourism demand within the context of the debate shaping the 2030 EU Agenda for Tourism. The development of touristic destinations must essentially consider the impact of climate change.

This is a debate which is unfortunately absent locally. In Malta, both the tourism industry as well as the Malta Tourism Authority (MTA) are only interested in numbers, more than anything else.  This is evidenced by the Deloitte report on the industry’s capacity, published some months ago. It is pertinent to remember that the Deloitte report points out that a projected supply of touristic accommodation, close to 5 million tourists annually would be required to ensure the sector’s long-term profitability (at an average 80 per cent occupancy throughout the year).  Tourism planning at its worst possible. Pure madness!

Land use planning concessions, left right and centre, have been dished out to attain this massive over-development. The tourism industry with government’s complicity has planned for this massive over-capacity, in the process ignoring the reality on the ground.

The JRC study emphasises that “the last three decades of research have failed to prepare the (tourism) sector for the net-zero transition and the climate disruption that will transform tourism in the 2050-time horizon.”

The study finds a clear north-south pattern in tourism demand changes: “northern regions benefitting from climate change and southern regions facing significant reductions in tourism demand.”

Southern coastal regions are projected to lose a significant amount of summer tourists, around 10 per cent, in the warmer climate scenarios considered by the study. This compares to a projected significant increase of approximately 5 per cent in the Northern European coastal regions.

The projected shift in tourism is not only regional: it would also be seasonal.

Such studies are indicative. However, they should be taken note of and have a bearing on the essential planning which is required if we are to be as prepared as can be for the climate changes which are on our doorstep. Matters may possibly even turn out to be far worse than what is being projected! Hence the need for more focused studies on what lies in store.

Both the industry and the Tourism Ministry are oblivious to all this. They are still euphoric on the “post-Covid record number of tourists”, ignoring the changes on the horizon.

Climate change is impacting everything, not just tourism. It is already impacting water resources, the infrastructure, coastal protection, energy, biodiversity, agriculture as well as health.

Only recently we read in the media that at a recent informal meeting of EU Health Ministers held at the Canary Islands, Health Minister Chris Fearne raised the impact of climate change on health. He was reported as having emphasised the need to consider, in depth, the impacts which climate change is having on our health systems. Fearne is obviously planning ahead, not just on the impacts of the climate on health planning. His radar is most obviously focused on the composition of the EU Commission which this time next year will be in the process of being screened by the EU Parliament and its various committees.

Whatever the motivation on the importance of climate change, it is imperative that we plan ahead, definitely beyond the immediate future.

Unfortunately, the Ministry responsible for climate change hasn’t got an inkling of all this. It should be leading the way in discussing and planning how best to adapt to climate change and to mitigate its impacts. Instead, it is focused on the unofficial electoral campaign for the EU Parliament.

Adapting to climate change will require substantial behavioural change which successive governments have been reluctant to encourage through adequate policy initiatives. Climate change will not go away. We can only adapt to the change and seek to implement the required mitigation measures. Without behavioural change we are doomed.

It is about time that we act, before it is too late.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 3 September 2023

Tears of the Earth

As a result of mistreating the earth, we are damaging our own home: our common home. We are inflicting self-damage.

In the words of Leonardo Boff, the Franciscan Liberation Theologist, as a result of this mistreatment, the earth is in tears. In his 1995 seminal publication, Cry of the earth, cry of the poor, Boff emphasises that the tears of the earth are reflected in the daily tribulations of the vulnerable and the poor. They are the most impacted by the reactions of the earth to the mistreatment that it is continuously subjected to. It is the vulnerable and the poor who are bearing the brunt of droughts and floods, extreme temperatures, hurricanes and the rising sea level.

The basic clear message is that environmental policy and social policy are intertwined. Opposing and obstructing action to address environmental issues, at the end of the day, has a direct impact on the those most vulnerable amongst us.

Environmental degradation is one of the causes of social injustice. Consequently, enhancing the protection of the environment is also essential to address and reduce social injustice. The Earth is our common home. We share a common future: all the damage we cause to the earth boomerangs back to us. The ecology does not just add colour to our landscape: it is the very foundation of life itself. Nature is not just a desirable decoration to be captured on photographs, videos or paintings. Nature provides essential services without which, life, on this planet is not possible.

Unfortunately, we live in a world which tends to ignore non-monetary value. We tend to reduce everything to its equivalent in euro, pound, dollar or yen. It is the only value considered of relevance. This is the underlying reason for the general failure to appreciate the importance of the ecology in our daily lives. In fact, to some of us it is incomprehensible that we live in an eco-system. They believe that we live in an economy!

We need to understand that life itself is dependent on the eco-system services that are freely provided by nature. These services include water, fertile soil and clean air – all of which are being systematically ruined as a result of the so-called “development”.

Trees are being continuously chopped down and agricultural land gobbled up in order to make way for a never-ending building spree, including the large-scale road infrastructural projects.

Trees are a gift of nature. In addition to their various fruits, they supply us with oxygen, without which we cannot breathe. They produce this oxygen by absorbing carbon dioxide, retaining the carbon and releasing the oxygen in the process. As a result, trees provide us with two essential services free of charge: oxygen to breathe and a natural deposit for carbon – what we refer to as a “carbon sink”. Trees are the natural alternative to carbon capture technology. Carbon capture technology – used as part of the technological response to climate change – costs millions to produce and operate. Yet we have a natural alternative which we continuously discard. It is a free service and hence it is not appreciated. Large-scale deforestation, accumulated over many years, is one of the contributors to climate change.

We are significantly more dependent on nature than on the size of our country’s GDP and yet while we worry with the fiscal deficit, many ignore the ever-increasing environmental deficit. Seriously addressing this environmental deficit is essential before it is too late. No bale-out procedures are available to address this environmental deficit.

The signs of the ever-increasing environmental deficit are here for all to see. We need to act the soonest, in order to be in a position to reduce the impacts. It will get substantially worse than it already is. We are already running late.

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday: 27 August 2023

A ticking time bomb

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

published in Times of Malta: 3 August 2023

Opposizzjoni għar-restawr tan-natura

Il-Parlament Ewropew presentement qiegħed jiddiksuti l-qagħda tal-bijodiversità fl-Unjoni Ewropeja u l-ħtieġa urgenti li din tkun restawrata. Dan qed isir f’kuntest tad-dibattitu li għaddej dwar il-proposta tal-Kummissjoni Ewropeja fuq regolamenti dwar restawr tan-natura, element essenzjali tal-Pjan l-Aħdar (Green Deal) tal-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Il-ħsara akkumulata kkawżata mill-bniedem lin-natura u lill-proċessi naturali hi waħda sostanzjali. Tħares kif tħares lejha, din il-ħsara għandha impatt fuq il-kwalità tal-ħajja tagħna lkoll. Hu impatt fuq dak li hu essenzjali għall-eżistenza tal-ħajja innifisha: fuq il-klima, fuq il-kwalità tal-arja, kif ukoll fuq il-biedja u fuq il-kapaċità li nipproduċu l-ikel.   

Meta in-natura ġġarrab il-ħsara, dan hu rifless ukoll f’impatti ekonomiċi kif jidher ċar fl-istudju dwar l-ekonomija tal-bijodiversità kkordinat mill- Professur Sir Parta Dasgupta mill-Università ta’ Cambridge fl-2021. Il-ħarsien u r-restawr tan-natura hu diġà l-iskop ta’ diversi inizjattivi, mhux biss fuq livell Ewropew. Fuq livell globali hemm il-ħidma li qed issir bħala parti minn xogħol il-Konvenzjoni dwar il-Bijodiversità, iffirmata fl-1992 f’Rio waqt is-Summit ambjentali.

Fis-summit dwar il-bijodiversità li sar f’ Montreal iktar kmieni din is-sena, l-komunità internazzjonali għamlet pass kbir il-quddiem meta ftehmet dwar trattat  fuq il-ħarsien tas-saħħa tal-ibħra, ftehim li dwaru diġa ktibt f’dawn il-paġni (Illum 12 ta’ Marzu 2023: Il-legat ta’ Arvid Pardo: niskopru mill-ġdid il-vokazzjoni marittima.)

F’livell ta’ Unjoni Ewropeja hemm diversi regoli li jservu ta’ gwida għall-istati membri dwar tmexxija sostenibbli f’diversi oqsma. Minkejja dan, il-qagħda tal-bijodiversità qatt ma kienet daqshekk ħażina.

Il-ħarsien tal-bijodiversità hu xogħol kontinwu, li sfortunatament jimxi bil-mod wisq.

L-iskop ta’ dawn ir-regoli għar-restawr tan-natura huwa biex ikunu ndirizzati l-ekosistemi fi stat ta’ degradazzjoni u dan billi jkun hemm koordinazzjoni effettiva ħalli tkun implimentata aħjar legislazzjoni eżistenti. Dan ikun ta’ kontribut biex possibilment ikunu ndirizzati b’mod adegwat il-miri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja dwar it-tibdil fil-klima.

ir-regolamenti proposti jfasslu miri dwar ir-restawr tal-ekosistemi fuq l-art, mal-kosta, fl-ilma ħelu u fl-ibħra. Jimmiraw ukoll dwar il-ħtieġa li ma jintilfux spazji miftuħa ħodor fiż-żona urbana, inkluż li ż-żoni imħaddra fl-ibliet u l-irħula tagħna ma jonqsux.  Il-proposta tindirizza ukoll il-ħarsien tar-riżorsi tal-ilma kif ukoll ir-restawr tal-ekosistemi agrikoli u tad-dakkara (pollinators), bħalissa taħt theddida iktar minn qatt qabel.

Ikun meħtieġ li l-istati membri jħejju pjan nazzjonali li jidentifka l-miżuri meħtieġa għar-restawr ta’ dan kollu b’identifikazzjoni ta’ miri ċari. L-Unjoni Ewropeja qed tippjana li talloka €100 biljun għal dan kollu.

L-abbozz ta’ regolamenti dwar ir-restawr tan-natura li dwaru kien hemm vot fil-Kumitat Parlamentari Ambjentali tal-Parlament Ewropew nhar il-Ħamis bil-kemm ġie approvat. Irnexxielu, għalissa, jsalva kemm kemm minn attakk feroċi ikkoordinat mill-Partit Popolari Ewropew (EPP) appoġġat mill-allejati parlamentari tiegħu fuq il-lemin.  

Il-futur ta’ dawn ir-regolamenti dwar ir-restawr tan-natura, f’dan il-punt, huwa xi ftit inċert. Qegħdin viċin wisq tal-elezzjonijiet għall-Parlament Ewropew u forsi mhux l-aħjar żmien għal diskussjoni ta’ din ix-xorta. Il-Corporate Europe Observatory, li jsegwi il-lobbying fuq livell Ewropew, iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa irrapporta li l-forzi tal-lemin fil-Parlament Ewropew huma determinati li joqtul kull inizjattiva li baqa’ mill-Ftehim l-Aħdar (Green Deal) fi pjan biex jirbħu l-voti tan-negozji u tal-bdiewa fl-elezzjonijiet li ġejjin.

Fl-elezzjonijiet riċenti ġewwa l-Olanda, il-partit ġdid BBB (partit agrarju, lemini u populist) li sar l-ikbar partit fil-pajjiż jidher li kien il-kawża biex il-Partit Popolari Ewropew jintensifika l-opposizzjoni tiegħu għall-miżuri li jirriżultaw mill-Ftehim l-Aħdar (Green Deal).

F’dan il-qasam, il-futur hu mċajpar. Iktar ma ndumu ma niddeċiedu u naġixxu inqas ser ikun hemm ċans li l-ġenerazzjonijiet futuri jirtu dinja li fiha jistgħu jgħixu.  Jeħtieġ li naġixxu biex nirrestawraw u nħarsu l-ftit li baqa’ qabel ma jkun tard wisq.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 18 ta’ Ġunju 2023

Nirrikunsidraw is-sussidji tal-enerġija, l-ilma u l-fuel

Bla ebda dubju hu l-każ li l-użu tal-enerġija u l-ilma jkun issussidjat f’dan il-mument ta’ kriżi. Dan is-sussidju għandu jkun immirat biex jindirizza l-impatti soċjali ta’ żieda fil-prezz tal-enerġija u l-ilma sakemm nibqgħu taħt l-effett tal-impatti tal-invażjoni tal-Ukrajina. M’għandniex nieħdu t-triq il-faċli li twassal għal abbuż minn fondi pubbliċi imferrxa fuq kulħadd.

Is-sussidji għandhom ikunu indirizzat lejn min għandu l-ħtieġa tagħhom. Xi ħtieġa hemm li tissussidja lil min għandu l-mezzi biex ikampa?

Il-konsum bażiku tal-enerġija u l-ilma fid-djar tagħna għandu definittivament jibqa’ protett bis-sussidji għaż-żmien li ġej. Din hi neċessità soċjali biex primarjament ikunu mħarsa l-vulnerabbli u dawk bi dħul baxx. Imma lil hinn mis-sussidji applikati għal dan il-konsum basiku ta’ enerġija u ilma ma hemm l-ebda raġuni biex dan is-sussidju jkun japplika għal konsum iktar minn dak bażiku. Min għandu l-mezzi li jwasslu għal konsum ikbar għandu jkollu ukoll ir-riżorsi biex jerfa’ l-ispiża addizzjonali tal-konsum tiegħu jew tagħha.

Ma hemm xejn ikkumplikat f’dak li qed ngħid. Huwa l-mod kif wara kollox diġa jinħadmu l-kontijiet għall-ilma li nikkunsmaw: il-konsum bażiku tal-ilma jitħallas b’rati sussidjati, filwaqt li konsum ikbar tal-ilma diġa jitħallas b’rati kummerċjali. M’għandu jkun hemm l-ebda diffikultà li dan jinftiehem: huwa l-mod kif il-kontijiet tal-ilma ilhom jinħadmu għal iktar minn tletin sena!

Dan kollu hu ukoll dibattibbli meta nikkunsidraw il-konsum ta’ ilma u l-enerġija meta dan il-konsum ma jsirx fir-residenzi. Hu raġjonevoli li napplikaw is-sussidji biex inħarsu l-impiegi. Jeħtieġ imma li s-sussidji jkunu iffukati. Ikun għaqli għalhekk li perjodikament neżaminaw mill-ġdid il-kif u l-kemm b’mod li dawn is-sussidji jkunu raġjonevoli u mhux iktar milli nifilħu bħala pajjiż.

Ma jagħmilx sens imma, li l-użu kollu tal-enerġija u l-ilma jkun issussidjat. Hu meħtieġ li r-riżorsi limitati li għandna nużawhom bir-reqqa.

Iżda l-kaz tas-sussidji għall-konsum tal-fuels, jiġifieri s-sussidji applikati għall-petrol u d-dijżil hi storja kompletament differenti. Il-Gvern diġa, wara ftit ġimgħat, biddel ftit il-proposta oriġinali tiegħu billi ma baqax jissussidja l-konsum tal-fuel (primarjament dijżil) fil-każ ta’ opri tal-baħar imdaqqsa.

Ma hemm l-ebda ħtieġa soċjali biex ikun issussidjat il-petrol u d-dijżil. In-numru żgħir ta’ każi fejn l-użu ta’ karozzi privati hu meħtieġ biex tkun indirizzata d-diżabilita konnessa mal-mobilità jistgħu faċilment ikollhom għajnuna iffukata għall-ħtiġijiet partikolari tagħhom.

It-tneħħija tas-sussidji fuq il-konsum tal-fuel ikun ifisser żieda sostanzjali fil-prezz tal-petrolu u d-dijżil. L-impatt ewlieni tat-tneħħija ta’ dan is-sussidju fuq jkun wieħed pożittiv għax iwassal għal tnaqqis immedjat ta’ karozzi mit-toroq tagħna. Dan iwassal ukoll għal titjib fil-kwalità tal-arja.

Tajjeb li uħud jiftakru li 50 fil-mija tal-vjaġġi li nagħmlu bil-karozzi privati fit-toroq tagħna huma vjaġġi għal distanzi qosra. Il-parti l-kbira ta’ dawn il-vjaġġi, bi prezz rejalistiku tal-petrol u d-dijżil ma jsirux u minflok jintuża t-trasport pubbliku jew forom oħra ta’ mobilità sostenibbli. It-trasport pubbliku kif nafu hu bla ħlas!

Il-partiti parlamentari presentement qed jargumentaw b’veduti dijametrikament opposti. Min-naħa l-waħda l-Labour irid jibqa’ b’sussidji fuq il-konsum kollu filwaqt li l-PN qed jargumenta favur li dawn is-sussidji jkunu eliminati. Dan il-kuntrast bejn il-PLPN  dwar iż-żamma jew it-tneħħija tas-sussidji iħawwad l-imħuħ. Neħtieġu nimxu bir-raġuni anke meta nitkellmu dwar is-sussidji f’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi.

Ir-riżorsi tagħna huma limitati. Irridu nużawhom bil-għaqal biex inkunu nistgħu nibqgħu ngħinu lill-vulnerabbli.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 30 t’April 2023

Wara l-maltemp ………………

Wara l-maltemp jiġi l-bnazzi. Mhux biss. Huwa ukoll il-ħin biex nieħdu ħsieb il-ħsarat li saru mill-maltemp.

Iktar minn hekk hu żmien ukoll biex nidentifikaw in-nuqqasijiet li wasslu għal dawn il-ħsarat u nirrimedjawhom.

Waħda mill-problemi l-kbar li mhiex mogħtija attenzjoni biżżejjed hi dwar x’qiegħed jiġri mill-ilma tax-xita.

Hawn wisq binjiet bla bjar jew bi bjar żgħar wisq biex fihom jinġabar l-ilma tax-xita.

Il-konsegwenza ta’ dan, kif nafu, hi ta’ ħafna ilmijiet fit-toroq u ta’ drenaġġ ifur waqt maltempati bħal ta’ din il-gimgħa.

Kif għidt repetutament ir-responsabbiltà għal dan kollu hi ta’ tlieta: ta’ min jiżviluppa l-bini u ma jipprovdix bjar jew bjar kif meħtieġ, tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar li ma tivverifikax biżżejjed li qed jinbena bini mingħajr bjar inkella bi bjar żgħar kif ukoll tal-Korporazzjoni għas-Servizzi tal-Ilma li toħroġ permessi biex bini jitqabbad mas-sistema tad-drenaġġ mingħajr ma tagħmel il-verifika meħtieġ dwar l-eżistenza ta’ bjar.

Kulħadd irid jerfa’ ir-responsabbiltà tiegħu.

Kultura ta’ dipendenza

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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