Parliamentary replies do at least serve a purpose. They often help shed light on what the government might or might not be doing in any particular area or sector.

Three recent parliamentary replies to questions of mine are worth commenting about and reflecting upon.

In replying to PQ 25707 on transport-related pollution in Sliema (particularly the Qui-si-Sana and Savoy areas), the Prime Minister said he was informed that the Malta Environment and Planning Authority was not obliged to be consulted on traffic rerouting. Any verbal “reassurances” given afterwards by the parliamentary secretary are not enough to mitigate the official written reply given.

When I asked the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Communications whether Malta happens to have any sustainable transport studies or reports as they do in other EU countries, like the Baltics, I was officially informed that Transport Malta has no such sustainable transport reports. PQ 25709 refers.

And, finally, when I brought up for the umpteenth time the long-festering problem regarding the importance and need for efficient and effective traffic management in Triq Antonio Schembri, Kappara, close to Chiswick School, the stock reply I got was that although there were various communications between Transport Malta, the administrative committee of Kappara and the San Ġwann local council, while further talks are expected to continue, according to Minister Austin Gatt, it all boils down to the need of the local council’s wardens to take remedial action together with the police. Transport Malta’s letter to the San Ġwann local council of March 15, 2011 refers.