Conflicting signals on climate change
While the Minister for Rural Affairs augured on the eve of our parliamentary debate on climate change that we should adopt a bi-partisan approach, he seems to have had no qualms about following up his recent partisan comments in the House with an...
While the Minister for Rural Affairs augured on the eve of our parliamentary debate on climate change that we should adopt a bi-partisan approach, he seems to have had no qualms about following up his recent partisan comments in the House with an article on January 19 in which he once again accused us of political gimmickry.
The NGOs seem to have thought differently so much so that Friends of the Earth, among others, commented on the same day in this newspaper that although they shall be analysing the government's draft set of proposals and recommendations "as with any other report, this would be fairly useless unless a sound implementation structure was imposed and in this case it should be nothing less than a Bill". Although as a party we cannot hide our disappointment and concern that the government preferred to shoot down our proposal for a commitment to legislate on the subject of climate change, it is trying to give the impression that it is keeping the door open by not excluding administrative and/or legislative measures in future.
The speeches in Parliament by a number of ministers, particularly Minister Austin Gatt, seem to suggest the contrary, since he brought up a hundred and one technicalities as to why we should and could not legislate on climate change.
The PL will nevertheless not succumb to such "provocation".
We have already gone on record stating that not only will we analyse the government's strategic draft report but we are publicly committed already as of now that when such a report is tabled in Parliament by the government we shall come forward in the House with a technical response that a balanced, objective and serious evaluation calls for.
We shall not be the obstructionists that the government chose to be. Our sole objective is to push ahead ideally on a bi-partisan level.
Being snubbed over our proposal for climate change legislation will in no way deter or dilute our commitment to retain climate-change related issues at the top of our future environmental and sustainable development agenda.