The biggest financial headache for WasteServ resulted from the haste by the previous administration to enter into certain “suspicious” contracts before the general election, Environment Minister Leo Brincat said in Parliament.

Replying to Opposition criticism levelled at him during the general discussion on the Waste Management Plan for the Maltese Islands, Mr Brincat said on Tuesday it was no wonder the Opposition had strongly criticised the National Audit Office report on waste management.

WasteServ directors would be making proposals and action plans on how to avoid similar mistakes in the future. WasteServ was going through the NAO report to identify defective procurement procedures and introduce best practice.

The present government had commissioned a study on the possibility of exporting waste to countries where EU directives would be observed. Other options included waste incineration.

WasteServ is going through the NAO report to identify defective procurement procedures

Mr Brincat said WasteServ was burdened with a bad deal that the Nationalist government had struck with a well-known contractor to throw waste in quarries.

The eco-contribution system needed revision in view of possible infringements of EU directives.

Thirty per cent of waste at the Sant’Antnin plan was considered as reject and, under the previous government, a private contractor had to send it to a refinery in Spain because it was unacceptable for export to European countries.

The Nationalist government had also been considering the introduction of a door tax. This government wanted to ensure value for money. It wanted to know why project overruns varied so much from estimates and why certain contracts were awarded to people who had been previously disqualified.

The minister said the waste disposal education campaign would focus on the need to change behavioural patterns. It would address individual responsibilities and teach people why and how to recycle waste. An internal committee had been set up to look at the matter of farm waste in a holistic way.

Turning to investments in waste regeneration, he said local and foreign investment proposals would be considered after serious due diligence exercises were held.

WasteServ would consider giving non-core areas to private investors. But he warned that it was important not to let the use of waste resources become a vehicle for money laundering, as happened in neighbouring countries.

The previous government had given consideration to the privatisation of the sector. The former WasteServ chairman had claimed that workers had been engaged on contract so that the company would not have its hands tied in privatising the sector.

The government was aware that the contract would expire before the end of the year. It was looking at all options and responsible decisions that bene-fited the company and the workforce would be taken.

Charlo Bonnici (PN) said that one would have thought the government would have come up with an ambitious plan to accomplish what it repeatedly criticised the PN of failing to do.

However, it ended up with a far less ambitious plan, the success of which would be measured through waste separation and recycling. After 14 months, little had been done.

Malta had been told off by the European Commission for falling behind in projects to generate clean energy and reach the 10 per cent target.

Manure was being dumped illegally, contaminating produce. He criticised the fact that the Marsa incinerator, so close to the abattoir, was being expanded.

How was the government ensuring that plastic shopping bags weren’t being given out by retailers?

Mr Bonnici said he could not fail to mention the contract by which WasteServ would buy services from the private sector. The minister had criticised this contract in the past. Yet, the system was still in place.

Labour MP Marlene Farrugia said one had to look at the country in terms of how it was developing because this impacted the waste management plan needed.

One had to study what type of waste was generated and what one could do with it to turn it into a resource. This affected the nature and sustainability of the environment. Of all the suggestions listed in the plan, education was crucial.

In recent years, the idea was not just about making the EU happy but it appeared that Malta was seriously trying to create a resource from waste. This was important because the island was quite short on resources and this could be one of the resources it so sorely needed, Dr Farrugia said.

Fredrick Azzopardi (PN) said no concrete initiatives were being proposed but, rather, building on previous attempts to curb the accumulation of waste.

Although initiatives had been taken against more generation of waste through the building of waste recycling plants, a thermal treatment facility and engineered landfills, yet more had to be done.

Malta has been told off by the European Commission for falling behind in projects to generate clean energy

Disposing of untreated waste was squandering resources and was also a missed opportunity to employ more workers in this sector and reduce the negative impact on people’s health.

Nationalist MP Ċensu Galea said the proper, efficient implementation of the plan would be the key to the future of Malta’s well-being and the protection of the environment.

He pointed out that the majority of waste was not produced in Malta. Hence, there was difficulty in implementing prevention at the source. Although the government was proposing the further promotion of producer responsibility, one had to understand that most producers incurred big costs to abide by the laws.

Mr Galea said that implementation of the extended producer responsibility might not necessarily work considering the costs entailed. He referred to the prices that had to be borne by commercial entities themselves. While agreements had to be reached among companies, many preferred not to honour their part and they tried to get rid of their waste in other ways.

Keeping this in mind, the government should clarify what it meant by the proposed revision of eco-contributions. Did it mean an increase in price?

Mr Galea questioned what was meant by the government when it proposed to increase the treatment of waste. Referring to collection practices, he said the government was facing the challenge of changing the mentality of society in not having domestic waste collected on a daily basis. The local councils had a very important role to play.

Mr Galea referred to the export of waste to other European countries and called for a clarification. Interjecting, Mr Brincat said that while the government wanted to encourage waste exportation, one had to be wary of illegal dumping of waste in other countries.

Continuing, Mr Galea said there were a number of hurdles to overcome in exporting waste. He referred to abusive disposal of animal waste and said that the 19 cases reported over the last two years did not indicate that the abuse was widespread. He called on the media not to raise false alarms.