The House of Representatives is the highest institution of the land. Parliament is where people should be looking for leadership and some sort of reassurance that, irrespective of the troubles in their personal lives, the country is being run in good fashion by those they have elected and entrusted with the running of the country.

Moreover, when it comes to the thornier issues of the day, the members of the House, through their debates, also need to provide something of a moral compass.

This has certainly not been the case over the last two weeks. We have had an Opposition plumbing certain depths it could be argued it should not have plumbed. We have also had a government side of the House that has resorted to tit for tat games over voting procedures.

Now a breaking point has been reached and one thing is for certain: something clearly needs to be done lest the current situation continues ad infinitum.

As Opposition leader Joseph Muscat told this newspaper in an interview last week, taking him only slightly out of context: “We can carry on filibustering like this forever”. And the Opposition, if last week’s continued disorder in the House is anything to go by, clearly intends doing so as it persisted in the same vein in two of three of this week’s sittings.

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, as reported in today’s issue, appears similarly inflexible on the issue, and the parliamentary debates of the coming weeks appear set to become battles over technicalities that the man in the street will find very difficult to follow.

We hope that some common ground can be found in the very near future in the best interests of the country.

Meanwhile, the Opposition’s tactics, be they misguided or spot on, could very well backfire. Where there was once in the recent past an unruly backbench, now that same backbench will most likely huddle up, close ranks and form a concerted front against its traditional enemy.

If the Opposition’s intention was once to divide and conquer, that will surely no longer be possible, at least for the time being. The government backbenchers, it can be safely assumed, will stick together more tightly than ever.

Something clearly needs to be done, and done quickly, to resolve the situation – if not for the House, the country’s lawmaking and democratic processes, to be put back on an even keel, then at least to put the citizenry’s mind at rest that their House is in order, that it has not been brought into disrepute and that the wheels of the country are well oiled and turning.

Environmental infamy

The country’s environmental credentials have been suffering more than usual of late.

The government’s inflexibility to bend to public outcry from both sides of the country’s very deep political divide over the highly contentious Delimara power station extension, its equally contentious decision to reopen the spring hunting season this year, its pivotal role against the proposed international trade ban on tuna and its delay in meeting air pollution reduction targets are all symptomatic of putting the euro, or, in the case of hunting, votes, before people’s health.

This cannot continue.

But if the government is looking for economic gain, it should look to one of the country’s main economic pillars: tourism.

Green tourism has been a fast growing segment over recent years and with being green being all the rage, the area is bound to continue increasing in popularity, particularly in northern Europe – an important source market for the country’s tourism sector, and a market that needs to be tapped further.

But, sadly, the hunting issue has taken its toll over the years, and Malta’s stiff opposition to the international trade in tuna this year could very well become another blemish on the country’s international environmental credentials. The power station debacle, if it does indeed ever make pan-European news, would only serve to reinforce the notion that the

country is simply not up to the green challenge it is facing.

The Delimara decision

Next week, the Phoenicia Hotel could well be the venue of yet another grave undermining of the country’s environment, with the Malta Environment and Planning Authority due to determine the Delimara power station extension project application – the source of so much debate, controversy and discontent.

And the government would do well to heed public outcry on an issue as sensitive as the one at hand.

The government has, despite widespread public outcry, forged ahead with the extension and the more than somewhat dubious choice of technology.

This issue must be distinctly separated from allegations of corruption. Whatever one’s feelings about corruption, many would rather have an environmentally-friendly power station born of corruption than a spic and span deal that burdens the public with still more pollution in an already suffering environment.

As we said last week, the type of technology chosen for the extension is probably the worst thing for the environment but the best thing for the state’s coffers. But, we will ask again, can we really put a price tag on the public’s health, or indeed a price tag on any potential, however remote, risk to health and the quality of life that the government holds so close to its heart?

At the end of the day, one wonders what the result of a hypothetical referendum on the issue would reveal, or indeed whether the 10 per cent of the population quota to force a referendum could be mustered. This, if not found to be incongruous with the Referenda Act, could be the Opposition’s next move in what promises to be an ongoing saga long after Mepa’s case files for Thursday’s hearing have gathered dust.