Minister blasts opposition on neutral climate change stand

Resource Minister George Pullicino has heavily criticised the opposition for sitting on the fence on the issue of climate change and wondered if the lack of a clear stand on the national strategy meant there was disagreement on such national policies within the party itself.

Concluding the discussion on the national strategy aimed at reducing emissions that contribute to global warming, Mr Pullicino said that none of the opposition speakers had entered into the most important aspects of the proposals being put forward to reach set targets.

It seemed that the opposition was holding back to declare its position whenever there were important issues. At the same time, the party allowed its speakers to talk in a way of pleasing one an all. This was a mistaken attitude which did not benefit the country at all.

Minister Pullicino said that opposition MPs did not seem to have read the climate change report or the final document well. It said that consumers must pay the real price in order to stimulate a change of attitude to consumption. The experts had said this even before the government had introduced the higher utility tariffs.

Labour leader Joseph Muscat had pulled off the mask when, shortly after the 2008 election, he had told The Times he was not ready to commit himself to scaling back the utility tariffs.

Mr Pullicino wondered how the opposition would support the government in its efforts to curb excessive water extraction from the aquifer, and to solve the public transport problem. The same held for the power station extension: the Public Accounts Committee had not felt satisfied on the issue, and had tabled a motion to have the matter discussed in the House.

Interjecting on a point of order, PAC chairman Charles Mangion (PL) said the power station extension had not yet been discussed by the committee.

Continuing, Mr Pullicino said that once the new power plant was up and running it would mean a reduction of 400,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions.

The opposition must choose: either to work with the government on the environment or continue to be reactionary, taking decisions as in its best interest.

No opposition member had mentioned the government's decision to give non-polluting appliances, like energy-saving bulbs, to the most vulnerable strata of society.

The government had no difficulty coming before the House to discuss its waste management, or any other consideration. But who would take part in the debate involve? On Tuesday, after having spoken for almost 90 minutes, Mr Brincat did not even have the deceny of staying on to listen to Minister Austin Gatt. The opposition benches had been left empty.

Dr Pullicino said Malta would not shoulder any responsibilities other than those it had as a member of the EU.

No one had mentioned the myriad of scheme the government offered.

As for energy performance of buildings, maybe Mr Brincat had not noticed that more than 95 persons had been appointed assessors in this regard.

Unlike what Mr Brincat had said, there had been no minority report by any member of the climate change committee. The government had already called for an expression of interest in the submarine cable between Malta and Sicily.

Where did one go from here? The government would set up a structure to implement the report, for the benefit of the Maltese people as a whole, including the opposition's. This would need everybody's commitment because fewer CO2 emissions would mean better health.

This would mean sustaining the country's competitiveness. Failure would mean greater loads on all businesses, with bad consequences on people's jobs.

The opposition should understand what it was doing. Its placing of spokes in the government's wheels could mean a serious threat to people's jobs, concluded Minister Pullicino.

Earlier in the sitting, Evarist Bartolo (PL) said it was evident that reducing emissions would contribute in a positive way to the general quality of life of the Maltese people. The problem laid with the government itself: documents issued were good in themselves but then either nothing happened of the opposite was done.

Nationalist MP Franco Debono said that if Malta did not invest in the environment they way it should, then it would have to build another hospital because people would be falling sick.