Information signs at Mdina

The Mdina local council would like to correct any misconceptions that may have arisen from the article "Information signs in Mdina vandalised" (August 3).

The information signs were installed on the evening of Friday, July 19, interrupting the celebration of Our Lady of Mount Carmel's feast. A few signs were pulled out of their fresh concrete settings and carefully placed against the wall nearby. The council was unaware that these signs were to be installed and at so inappropriate a time.

Despite the objections of the council, these signs were re-installed on the following Monday by the Mdina Rehabilitation Project Co-ordinator under police protection. The Mdina local council strongly objected to the high-handed manner these signs were imposed on the city.

Following this ugly debacle, the council was called to a meeting with the chairman and project coordinator of the MRP on July 24, where it was made abundantly clear that the council was unanimous in the disapproval of these signs.

Loosely quoting from the Guidelines for the Establishment of the Mdina Rehabilitation Project, Section 5, Paragraphs 5.1; 5.2; 5.3 as well as Section 6, Paragraph 6.1 and 6.2.

¤ The Mdina Rehabilitation Committee does not have the right to execute any works or projects whatsoever unless written approval is obtained from the Mdina local council.

¤ The Rehabilitation Committee is duty bound to respect the autonomy and responsibilities delegated to the Mdina local council or its representative.

¤ The Mdina local council has the right to advise and make suggestions to the rehabilitation committee.

¤ It is the duty of the project coordinator to liaise between the rehabilitation committee and the local council, also government departments and any other bodies.

¤ The coordinator is duty bound to ensure adequate and proper coordination with the local council, government bodies and departments, non-government bodies and societies, which exist in the locality on all matters related to the project.

For the above, the reasons behind the council's objections are evident. Also, it should have been a matter of common courtesy that the council be informed that these information signs were to be installed.

The council has a policy barring any advertising within the city. In our opinion, they are completely incompatible with their surroundings, severely clash with and have a detrimental effect on the period ambience of the town.

Moreover, these signs are of a commercial nature and thereby open the "flood gates" to yet further over-exploitation in this extremely sensitive place. Had there been any prior consultation with the local council it would have been abundantly clear that the council was already committed to a policy of refusing any such like notices.

As such, these signs completely undermine our policy and put us in an embarrassing position.

In a similar vein, the council finds it curious that so much emphasis was given by the MRP to the unsuitability of the colourful oleander trees at the entrance of the Vilhena Palace. Yet, these obtrusive and colourful signs were not considered by the MRP as impinging on their surroundings. We would also point out that these trees were also removed in an equally abrupt and discourteous manner.

The council is not against providing information per se about the architectural heritage of the city and it would be more than pleased to make suggestions. However, we would emphasise that this be done with a certain elegance and style.

We note that in Vittoriosa unobtrusive marble plaques have been affixed to many of its important buildings. These plaques give information about the buildings' original function as well as other such details.

It is pertinent to the issue that although these plaques were installed many years ago, they have withstood the rigours of time are still in situ. More importantly, they are quite unobtrusive and have no further function other than providing information to the casual passer-by.