I would like to comment on a particular remark that appeared in Daphne Caruana Galizia’s “Notebook” (TMIS, 10 November).

This article dealt primarily with the disproportionate taxation on air travel. I agree with most points raised and the trend in declining air departures will attest to that argument. However, Ms Caruana Galizia’s conviction that high taxation on cars is justifiable on environmental grounds and because there is an alternative – the use of Malta buses – cannot remain unchallenged.

First point: The Malta buses are not an alternative to personal road transport (PRT). Full stop.

During a workday morning, if every one, going to wherever, uses only public transport, the available buses would not cope getting all commuters to their destination on time. 254 buses x 40 commuters x 8 (20 minute trips for the period 6 to 8.40 am) potentially could carry 82000 commuters. It is impossible to dovetail all transiting passengers’ departure times to use up all available seats and standing space. Significant numbers of commuters will arrive late at their destination with consequent disruption of work schedules. The current public transport system cannot realistically be expected to carry more than one third of the commuters who normally drive to their destination in the morning. There would be no alternative for the rest but to use their car. Significant social and economic repercussions would occur if there were no cars available for the masses. The leisure industry would fold and its employees (for whom this is often their second job) discharged. Family recreation would be ruined. It is the people’s ease of mobility that allows the leisure industry, and commerce in general, to remain buoyant and the economy turning. When the park and ride scheme is up and running, it will test what happens when the peoples’ wheels (wings, sic) are clipped. Hopefully Valletta will not become another silent city also by day.

Maltese who want to improve their standard of living work longer hours, a second or part-time job and at extraordinary times. Using public transport to go to work and back and than setting off for the second job and the return home could add three hours of transit time. Door to door, with two work places to go to every day I would need from three to four hours a day just to go to and get back from work if I had to use public transport. Driving myself to work saves me at least two hours. Time is too precious.

No, Ms Caruana Galizia, buses are not an alternative to using one's own car. The issue here is whether cars should be taxed so much. A car should be appropriately taxed like any other activity, in a just and proportionate manner and taking into consideration the significant economic activity dependant on the availability of personal road transport. Public transport here is unable to service even half the requirements of half the population.

Point Two: Every human activity harms the environment to a lesser or greater extent. If it comes to arguing against disproportionately high taxes, the present methods used to tax cars are actually harming the environment. There is a disincentive to replace vehicles with newer efficient models. With cars becoming about four per cent more efficient every five or six years, it is easy to see that if 90 per cent of the vehicles in Malta are less than 10 years old, there would be a national saving of 10 per cent on the fuel bill or around Lm10 million at the pumps (25 million litres of fuel).

Talking of disproportionate taxation and the environment brings to mind pleasure marine craft. These are registered for a few hundred Maltese liri, irrespective of size, and the powers that be deemed it fit to allow a VAT rate of five per cent on new boat registrations a few months before Malta’ accession to the EU. How is that for the environment? A 52ft fast boat advertised recently in the media had two 600 hp engines and clocked 1000 hours, used a few months of the year. With a fuel consumption of five litres of diesel per kilometre, that boat used up more than 180,000 litres of fuel. My car would use that amount in 170 years of daily use and I would have been able to drive three million kms. Alternatively, with that amount of fuel, we would be able to heat our homes for 60 winters.

People purchase cars not only for their primary function of transport. Some purchase particular models purely as a status symbol (c.f. CHOGM and Minister’s vehicles!). Undeniably, a significant percentage purchase a particular vehicle for its driving characteristics, or its engineering qualities or even for pure aesthetics. Not every one takes pleasure in plastering the walls of their homes with incissionijiet tal-granmastri and other ornaments. To quote a perplexed remark I came across in a woman’s magazine, “What is it with men and cars?” This typifies Ms Caruana Galizia’s perception on cars. I cannot imagine her making exclusive use of public transport. Yet, when it is time to replace her car, she would need to shell out the equivalent of 40 years worth of annual family-holiday departure tax as registration tax and VAT.

It is highly unfair and discriminatory when cars are taxed out of the market to the detriment of car enthusiasts.

Let there be an effective, efficient and cost effective public transport where no time is wasted and people will leave their car at home. Those who have looked at cars purely as a means of road transport may not even own a car anymore. But then, there will be fewer cows to milk and less car-related taxes to patch up public expenditure.

Albert M. Bezzina

MOSTA