Another sweeping statement, reduce VAT. Where did his polluter pays principle go?

It also seems he promised more car parks, read free parking.

With all due respect, it is a scientifically proven fact that more parking is equivalent to increased traffic and congestion.

Who the hell is writing their policies? I give up.

Maybe he thought we were all Austrian princesses

And what return on investment would this company expect to make per annum on an investment of €1b. Assuming a very low return of 10% per annum, for this sort of risky investment, you can do the maths.

No did not notice that, was too dazzled by the blond fuzz!

it would normally, but not if a reduction in VAT is compensated for by an increase in tax, being as it is that in the real life money does not grow on trees.

Then your average salaried middle class would end up with less spending power whilst your average tax evader would end up with more.

This might however increase female participation in the market as the mara tad-dar would have to go out to work in order to be able to afford a pizza once a week. Hmm quite a cunning plan really when one reflects upon in great detail..NOT!

In fact, at least the finance minister has a proper degree along with a warrant that requires the adherence to a code of ethics, which is probably a word unfamiliar to Joseph

CCS is an area still under research and development. The EU has its own advisory organisation about CCS – the ZEP (Zero Emissions Platform) – no, it is not named for Zep Muscat.
Although it will be important technology for the future, I think it is very risky and not a priority for a tiny country like ours to invest money in it now.
So putting CCS as an objective in the strategy to combat carbon emissions is an EU policy. Malta can benefit from the EU experience until the technology is feasible. The EU itself has set the use of CCS within the long term strategy, more likely to be implemented between 2020 and 2050.

http://www.zeroemissionsplatform.eu/

This is of course my personal view.

One other detail to note, is that both the UK and Norway already have the pipelines running from depleted oil fields in the north sea to onshore pumping facilities in place.

Is this being factored in as part of the investment? Or is that up to us?

http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/emissions/ccs/ccs.aspx

Note how the demonstrator plant envisaged for Scotland has been stopped, still the UK government remains ‘firmly committed’ as part of its industrial strategy.

In other words both the UK and Norway, with ample reserves of coal, and with a strong coal lobby, are exploring this method to reduce their dependence on oil. The Norwegian model introduces biomass given its managed forests.

Both models are, however, based on their respective countries’ natural resources.

It is also to be noted that ‘safe’ storage is defined as depleted oil and gas fields, or deep saline water aquifers. We definitely don’t have the first two, as for the saline aquifers, aren’t these too close to the fresh water aquifer for comfort? Unless they want to provide us with carbonated tap water of course…

Definitely.

It’s the new middle class you see, a swimming pool by right ‘biex inkunu bhas-sinjuri.’