So it appears that the ADT arm of the government is in the process of restructuring the way that registration costs upon vehicles are determined. Such sounds like a productive exercise and yet a couple of serious observations need to be made and a several equally serious questions need to be raised. After all this is no minor adjustment, the effects are to ripple across society and the people deserve an explanation that extends somewhat beyond the catchy tune of the ‘polluter pays’ principle.

One observation to be made here is that this restructure fits in well with the discriminatory fashion by which owners of imported second hand vehicles had been taxed throughout the previous term of the Nationalist government, occasionally running into the thousands of then-Liri. As with that anomaly so too in this proposal it appears that the intent could be interpreted to be to make second-hand vehicles less affordable to the population relative to their brand new counterparts. One would have to ask how closely the government is working with vehicle brand agents in formulating its policies as well as why it chose to enforce this measure at a time when fuel prices are rising.

A more pertinent question to be asked of the government is whether it has formulated a concrete plan as to how it intends on spending the additional revenues gained from such restructuring and, if so, to present its plan to the public in a format that is concise and easily read by laypersons. It should also be asked how this ‘polluter pays’ principle will fit into the government’s apparent intention to actually solve the pollution problem concerned. It is not very heartening that people will be able to opt-out of the restructure for the moment as ultimately the government is still shifting the burden upon the younger generations – whom already have hefty vehicle insurance premiums to contend with.

My own stand on the matter, from before the election, was that individuals should be held accountable for the pollution that they generate (as per the polluter pays principle) but that any taxation measure should be directly related to the restoration of the damage caused. Therefore an eco-tax on bubblegum should not somehow end up propping up Malta’s deficit, or worse, but should go straight towards repairing the detrimental effects of the product, bubble gum in this case. Oh yes… and I also strongly disapprove of measures that distribute burdens disproportionately throughout the strata of society without proper justification.

As stakeholders within this government the public is entitled to a minimum in esoteric opacity in being informed of what is being done to affect our daily lives. Furthermore and as an aside, as stakeholders it would be prudent to remind the authorities that Castille belongs to the people as a whole, not the glorified employees vouched for by less than half of the voting population.

This entry was posted on Thursday, July 3rd, 2008 at 8:30 pm and is filed under On Local Affairs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.