Speaking during yesterday morning’s parliamentary sitting, Dr Gonzi said the government has had the courage to introduce something that is being condemned by one and all but is so important for the country.

Dr Gonzi said government has studied every method possible to reduce, recycle or find alternative use for waste. He said that this law is aimed at promoting recycling and that although the eco-contribution is being called a tax, its revenue over the years should eventually decrease if the operators who fall under this scheme find ways to manage their own waste.

Capital expenditure on the infrastructure to manage waste is nearly Lm1.2 million, excluding various running costs.

Dr Gonzi said it costs the government Lm263 to collect and recycle one tonne of tyres and Lm35 to collect and recycle a tonne of glass. In the last six months, around 242 tonnes of tyres and 121 tonnes of glass have been collected to be recycled.

He said that the companies that fall under the scheme are being encouraged to reduce or manage the waste they generate. If companies recover the waste from products upon which eco-tax has already been paid, they may file an application with the authority and future contributions will be reduced by the amount of these payments. If an operator wants to avoid paying the eco-contribution, he must collect the waste generated by his products.

Regarding the risk that this tax may be passed on to the consumer, Dr Gonzi said that the government is strictly adhering to EU directives ensure that ensure this does not happen.

Labour MP Justyne Caruana said that when the Qortin landfill in Gozo was closed, the surrounding areas, which include Xaghra and Marsalforn, were infested by the rats that used to live at the landfill.

“These places were severely infested by rats and some people had to move out of their residences. The rats also destroyed large amounts of agricultural land in their quest to find an alternative food source,” she said.

Dr Caruana also spoke about the present waste management system in Gozo, with waste collection trucks having to be brought to Malta by Gozo Channel vessels.

She recalled that Gozo Minister Giovanna Debono had praised the decision to transport waste to Malta, saying that her dream had finally come true.

However, Dr Caruana said that this has created an anomalous situation whereby passengers, including tourists, travel to Malta on the same vessel that is carrying these trucks full of waste. She said that the stench is unbearable and even though various steps were taken to ensure that this did not happen, including properly sealing the waste and disinfecting the vehicle, the facts prove otherwise.

She said that last Monday, passengers were not allowed to board a vessel because toxic residue from one of the trucks had leaked. This, she said, has become unbearable.

Dr Caruana criticised the authority given to the minister to exempt anyone from paying eco-contributions. This, she said, may lead to abuse. If the list of companies to be exempted is to be published, the reason for their exclusion should be published as well.

Nationalist MP Francis Agius said the Maltese are well-known for their ability to avoid paying tax. He said that it takes time to change a people’s mentality but, he said, people must understand that managing waste is a top priority in order for the country to prosper.

He insisted that, contrary to what was being said, the law is not being introduced to help reduce the budget deficit but to change the Maltese attitude.

Labour MP Evarist Bartolo said that the government should have got the message that the method by which eco-tax is being introduced is not acceptable. Environment-alists, trade unions, consumers and businessmen had all expressed reservations as to how the system is to be implemented.

He said that eco-taxes are important if one is to preserve the environment, but only if they really are eco-taxes and not a means by which the government wanted to increase its revenue. There is a strong link between the introduction of eco-tax and the country’s deficit.

Mr Bartolo asked whether it was true that public expenditure is being reduced by Lm30 million. If so, then last November’s budget was a farce and, if anything, the government should have come to parliament to discuss such measures.

The way the government was introducing eco-tax gave a bad name to pro-environment taxes, as some non-governmental organisations had said. It will also add to the already large burden consumers have to face. Malta, he said, is high on the list of countries that have indirect taxation. It makes sense to introduce eco-taxes, but not the way the government is doing.

Mr Bartolo mentioned the Czech Republic as an example, saying that an environment tax will be introduced there next year. In view of this, a inter-ministerial committee had been set up last year, giving the government two years in which to plan the introduction of this tax. On the other hand, in Malta the eco-tax was being introduced without prior consultation.

He added that for an environment tax to work it must be fiscally neutral, which means that the consumers paying it will have it reduced from somewhere else, such as from income tax or social security contributions. The fact that eco-tax in Malta will be additional means that it is simply being introduced to generate revenue.

Labour MP Charles Buhagiar said that the Nationalists never learnt from their past mistakes. He recalled that during the 1992-1996 legislature, the government wanted to introduce a levy on construction waste, but the way the matter was handled led it to withdraw its proposal. The way eco-tax is being introduced is similar to the way in which the levy on construction waste was set to be implemented.