Blue skies, green skies

Smelling yet another electoral chance around the corner, Alternattiva Demokratika recently went to town lambasting PN MEPs for a poor voting record on the environment. Even if these accusations are loaded with political opportunism, they cannot be left unanswered.

AD's accusations are hollow because they attack us for a voting record which refers to the years 1999-2004, when Malta was not even an EU member. So we can hardly be criticised for something that took place before we were elected.

But the accusations are also incredibly ill-timed because they come just a few weeks after the European Parliament voted on a historic package on energy and climate change that made Europe the world leader on environmental standards. I am proud to have voted in favour of this package and it is bizarre to be accused on my voting record after I did so.

Even AD's specific claims on our voting record are seriously flawed.

AD attacked us on our vote on air quality. This beggars belief because we voted in favour of this law (Kramer Report) both at first reading and at second reading. And the Greens themselves voted in the same way.

Ha, says AD, but on one particular amendment you voted against higher air quality standards in inhabited areas. False. We voted in favour of increasing standards in inhabited areas, allowing for lower standards only in uninhabited areas and areas that are not permanently inhabited on the basis that in these areas there is no exposure to the public.

On the basis of this spurious claim, AD accuses me personally of voting in a manner that belies my efforts to control dust emissions in Malta. Now, over the past five years I have raised this issue in this very column on no fewer than seven occasions. I would hate to think that AD loathes my commitment to improving air quality when it should be supporting me.

On our voting record on vehicles (Groote Report), again AD slams us for voting against a Green amendment. While we did vote against the amendment proposed by the Greens, we voted in favour of another amendment supported by the vast majority in Parliament, including the Socialists and Liberals, leaving just the Greens and the Communists in their habitual minority.

Similarly, on CO2 emissions from vehicles (Davies Report) we voted in favour of the entire report, which delivered substantial improvements on emission standards. How strange that AD attacks PN MEPs on these votes but is completely silent on Labour MEPs (including Joseph Muscat) who voted exactly like us!

Is it me, or does this smell of political opportunism coming so soon after Dr Muscat suggested that he wants to award the sixth EP seat to AD?

The reason why our group, the EPP-ED, and the Greens in the European Parliament sometimes disagree on environmental issues is that we consider that some positions taken by the Greens are unrealistic.

European industry, including Maltese companies, is already facing very tough competition from third countries that do not apply the same environmental standards. So, whereas we need to increase environmental standards - that's what we vote for in these new laws - we should avoid unrealistically high targets demanded by the Greens as these will simply drive industry out of Europe or out of business, with massive job losses either way.

So AD's accusations are merely confirming that, given the choice between unrealistic environmental targets and your job, AD will simply forget your job.

That's scaremongering, retorts AD in full denial. Hardly. The recently-adopted law on the inclusion of aviation in the emissions trading scheme (Liese Report) proves my point.

Before the vote was taken on this law, Air Malta approached me, strongly arguing that this legislation could spell disaster for it because of what they saw as unrealistically high targets. I took the view that Air Malta and other airlines should still make an effort to raise their environmental standards, but this should be done in a sustainable and gradual manner without harming the airline. We succeeded in this approach and the law was adopted on this basis.

But readers should know that, had Parliament followed the Greens, Air Malta's worst fears would have materialised and it would have been driven out of business because of standards it cannot achieve.

This means that an AD MEP would have voted to drive Air Malta workers out of their jobs. That's not scaremongering, it's a recorded vote of the Green group which an AD MEP would join.

So AD owes a serious explanation to Air Malta workers and their families and to readers of The Times who use our national airline.

I have great respect for many people who militate in AD and, indeed, I feel that my own party should have done more to avoid losing some of them from its own ranks in the first place. And to attract others who have never been. But its accusations on our environmental record are too shallow by far, and by launching an unwarranted attack on our voting record, AD shows that it is more concerned with snatching a seat in the European Parliament than with what really goes on in there.

Ask your MEP on www.simonbusuttil.eu. Visit the new site: www.stopthedust.org.

Dr Busuttil is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament.