From Dr A. M. Bezzina

I was disappointed with Professor Mallia’s response (“No good air”, TMIS, 7 October) to my contribution (“Who’s burning our lungs?” TMIS, 30 September).

He deduced with jubilation that ‘there is no doubt which side I am on’. A number of my contributions in the media attest that I do harbour a passion for motor cars. Does Prof. Mallia believe that because I am interested in motor cars (but also road safety, mobility and road vehicle environmental impact), I enjoy traffic congestion and foul air?

Prof. Mallia has banished me in a Talibanesk manner to a “side” diametrically opposite to his. A guy interested in cars can also harbour environmental concerns.

I assure Prof. Mallia and FAA that their concerns for the environment are also my concerns. What I cannot understand is the hostility shown at my comments relating to vehicle taxation and the prospect of having a newer and cleaner vehicle fleet. No foot stomping is going to make a sizable portion of daily traffic disappear in the short term.

Perennial traffic congestion is related to school days and building developments. Building developments make a mockery of decent town planning and with EIAs flying out of the window, the motor car gets the flack at the end. Has anybody ever actually studied the mechanism by which our roads become congested predominantly on school days?

Prof. Mallia accuses me of “casting around to shift the blame”. I was in fact using numerical data to ensure a just sharing of the blame. Politicians are always ready to blame poor air quality on the car but are resolutely silent about the construction industry and their machinery as well as commercial vehicles and buses. With data from fuel consumption I have shown the relative importance of whom or what is to blame for the poor air quality derived from vehicle emissions. If Prof. Mallia wishes to ignore my conclusions it will only help many culprits get away. He also could have had the opportunity to prove me wrong with his own calculations.

My sidetracking to safety issues concerning SUVs and MPVs are relevant to the environment. In the UK the choice of purchasing an SUV is commonly based on the false assumption that it is the safest vehicle to be in, sacrificing fuel efficiency in the process. MPVs’ are actually safer, respect other road users more and are much more fuel-efficient.

As regards the increased risk to cyclists on Maltese roads, I admit that this is speculative and hope it will not happen. Statistically speaking, the more cyclists there are, the more likely they will start contributing significantly to road injury figures. I still think that compared to the case of The Netherlands I used as an example, cyclists are at greater risk in Malta than in that country. Incidentally, there are no official road accident statistics in Malta that show cyclists as a separate group so we can never know if injuries and fatalities of cyclists are “rare” or on the increase.

I take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Dr George Debono’s response (“Burning lungs”, TMIS, 7 October), which was written in the spirit of debate.

One of my first surgical cases I had to clerk in third year medical school back in 1982 was a Dutch or German cyclist recovering from a ruptured liver and spleen (the latter removed) following a hit and run incident in Blata l-Bajda. I still recall that he had a book by his side dealing with European coleoptera (beetles). This encounter, and sympathy for this fellow amateur entomologist, may have sparked my interest in road safety matters.

Albert M. Bezzina

MOSTA