Opposition accuses government of lack of political will on environment

The opposition's spokesman on the environment Leo Brincat yesterday in Parliament accused the government of lacking the political will and commitment to legislate on climate change.

Mr Brincat was winding up the debate on his Private Member's motion after Resources Minister George Pullicino proposed an amendment which, among others, urged the House to accept the 87 proposals made in the draft strategy drawn up by the Climate Change Committee.

In a speech punctuated by continuous interruptions, Mr Brincat said the opposition could not accept the minister's amendments to the motion because the Prime Minister had promised the House a wide discussion on the energy package decided by the EU Council of Ministers. Also, the amendment did not exclude administrative measures after adoption of the Bill.

He said this showed that the government was not ready to bind itself legally on climate change. Despite declarations about the government's commitment to reduce oil consumption, ministers had previously declared that Malta would continue to satisfy its energy needs through fuel oil.

The government could not close down the Marsa power station because the country would be left completely in the dark. The opposition agreed in principle with windfarms, but it wanted the government to provide detailed plans.

He said it was shameful that the government had still not published its national energy and alternative energy plans. The opposition had never attacked the members of the commission set up by the government, but wanted these experts to be chosen collectively by the government, the opposition and the NGOs. It also wanted that the interim measures presented by the government were feasible in an established timeframe. He called for a dialogue on climate change on the same lines as had happened in legislating on the financial sector.

Legislating on climate change was important because it affected tourism, transport, agriculture and coastal erosion. The minister should have told the House that the EU had repeatedly reprimanded the government for failing to send environmental reports on time and also because Malta had failed to reach environment targets.

Concluding, Mr Brincat said that the minister was interested in climate change legislation because he did not want to be accountable. While the opposition was being proactive and wanted a Bill drafted by experts, the government was still showing arrogance and would not learn from past mistakes.

Resources Minister George Pullicino had earlier called on the opposition to work with the government and arrive at a consensus on the climate change strategy.

He said this was important. Between 1990 and 2005 the demand for energy in Malta had doubled. But instead of also doubling the carbon dioxide emissions had risen from 1.4 million tonnes to two million tonnes. It had not done so thanks to measures that had been taken by various Nationalist governments. In 2006, vehicle emissions had accounted for 16 per cent of the carbon dioxide footprint.

Malta also had a target to ensure that by 2020, 10 per cent of its energy should come from new sources. Another target was to cap CO2 emissions from transport, agriculture and fishing at a maximum of five per cent more than the 2005 levels.

The Climate Change Committee recognised that Malta needed to improve the collection of its statistics to facilitate the science of climate change, and that the science of the economy of climate change was new but Malta must equip itself to face it.

Mr Pullicino said he was surprised that Mr Brincat, instead of reciprocating his cordiality in informing him of the strategy in advance, had attacked him for presenting it on the day of the debate. What Mr Brincat had not said was that the minister had told him that he wanted to build a close rapport with the opposition on the issue.

The minister denied that the climate change strategy report was a political document as claimed by Mr Brincat. It was an environmental report which at times even criticised the government. He said that after an agreement was reached on the binding targets, the strategy would be discussed in Parliament. It did not make sense to speak of checks and balances before one had the strategy in place. The minister did not discount the introduction of legislation imposing targets on public and private entities.

Labour had presented the Private Member's Bill to show that it was doing something about climate change. Mr Brincat had proposed a climate change committee in August, two months after the minister had appointed such a committee.

Mr Pullicino said he had appointed on the committee the vice-president of the Church's environmental commission, Dr Paul Pace.

Was the opposition ready to adopt the climate change strategy? The government was ready to discuss and adopt.

Mr Brincat had said he was not interested in the 2020 targets only, but also in interim results. He seemed not to know that the roadmap laid down exactly what must be done in six-monthly intervals. Labour seemed not to know that Malta had a compulsory system of reporting to the EU.

Mr Pullicino tabled a copy of a letter written by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon praising the measures that Malta was taking not only to handle climate change but also to forge ahead of other, larger countries.

One of the most important recommendations in the report was the evolution of a shadow price of carbon. Through a system that was being set up the government would know beforehand what carbon footprint large projects would have.

Mr Pullicino said the report also dwelt on good management of the demand for electricity by instilling greater user awareness and making sure the consumer paid the true cost of what he was consuming. He appealed to NGOs who had agreed that the consumer should pay the right price to now stand up and be counted.

Government and opposition must discuss the hard decisions which made the difference. Once the government went into detail on the use of alternative energy and a basket of technologies for renewable energy from sun and wind and waste management, would the opposition support its choices of sites?

Mr Pullicino said the government was not standing idle but seeking to draw up serious plans. There was already a plan for Enemalta to invest €1,210 million to generate clean energy in order to reach its targets. Investment would also be made in waste management, but the government wanted private enterprise to invest in windfarms.

Measures to these ends had already been taken in the budget, including the investment of €330 million from European funds. Mr Brincat was incorrect about the government's energy efficiency building.

Concluding, Mr Pullicino said the government wanted to put the environment at the core of its actions in all aspects together with private enterprise, and build up public awareness. But first there must be agreement and consensus on the measures needed.