Open invitation to visit MCR

In his contribution of December 11, Labour MP Joe Mizzi called for an inquiry at the restoration centre and offered Minister Louis Galea three reasons "to investigate MCR's top management through a public inquiry".

Mr Mizzi's first mistake of course is that he addresses the wrong minister. The Labour whip does not appear to have noticed that the cultural heritage sector of which MCR forms part is no longer within the portfolio of the Minister of Education.

Mr Mizzi is a shadow minister, yet he apparently has failed to notice that for eight months now there is a new Ministry for Youth and the Arts and that Minister Jesmond Mugliett is now responsible for the cultural heritage sector.

Does Mr Mizzi honestly think that any minister or the public will take him seriously when he states that "Firstly, MCR rarely contributes to major restoration projects in this country"? Mr Mizzi should be aware of the fact that the major restoration project in Malta in 2003 is the conservation of the entire collection at the Roman Domus museum in Rabat and that this project has been entrusted by Heritage Malta to MCR.

We would not normally think it necessary that Mr Mizzi be reminded that one of the largest private sector restoration projects awarded in 2003, the Conservatorio Vincenzo Bugeja Project, was also entrusted to MCR. When will Mr Mizzi like to take up an open invitation to visit MCR and find out how many restoration projects are being carried out for Heritage Malta, including major paintings from the Maritime Museum and Sciortino sculptures from the Museum of Fine Arts? The public will legitimately ask: How could a minister know all this and even begin to consider Mr Mizzi's calls for an inquiry?

Mr Mizzi then goes on to conjure two non-facts out of his imagination: "Dr Cannataci has already indirectly confirmed that MCR hardly ever tenders for large restoration projects (most of which concern state-owned property)".

Careful readers of The Times will be hard put to find any such confirmation on my part because I have never said anything of the sort. Indeed, most restoration work concerning state-owned property is often not offered by way of an open tender and, thus, MCR (and other organisations) are not even given an opportunity to tender!

Mr Mizzi moves on to other non-facts: "Dr Cannataci boasts of a large number of minor restoration projects carried out at MCR, which consist mostly of restoration work on small privately-owned artefacts." The facts are quite the opposite to what Mr Mizzi makes them out to be: the majority of artefacts restored by MCR belong to public entities such as Heritage Malta, churches or not-for-profit agencies such as The Wignacourt Museum.

It is only a small number of artefacts that come from the private sector. Many ministers know this, since they have visited MCR but Mr Mizzi apparently does not know this and has not bothered to get his facts right, so how can his allegations be given any credibility?

Mr Mizzi then continues his lone quest to have MCR "investigated by an independent authority" by renewing his allegation that "the cleaning of the Verdala mural was done with the use of a very aggressive cleaning agent that may leave long-term damaging effects".

The public may legitimately ask: Where was Mr Mizzi during the passage of the Cultural Heritage Act in 2001-2002? Did he understand that the Labour Party actually agreed to this legislation which established an independent authority, that is, the Superintendence, to monitor, among other things, conservation work carried out in Malta?

If Mr Mizzi has any evidence of what he said, all he needs to do is present this to the Superintendence who will take up the matter as it has already taken up other matters. The law already sets up such an independent authority in the form of the Superintendence and Mr Mizzi is welcome to use the mechanisms provided by law to check the quality of MCR's work.

We look forward to Mr Mizzi presenting his evidence and if he is right, ensure that remedial action be taken. If Mr Mizzi has no evidence to present or if his allegations are proven unfounded, at least MCR can look forward to an apology.

At this juncture, one cannot but note the tone used by Mr Mizzi who consistently speaks of a senior Italian conservator, trained in one of Italy's elite schools and with over 25 years experience in prestigious projects, as "a foreigner".

MCR is proud to be a centre of excellence with a strong international presence with 10 nationalities on its full-time staff. When searching to recruit the best staff available, MCR does not distinguish between Maltese and non-Maltese but seeks to recruit the best in a situation where very little Maltese have, to date, actually every received formal training in conservation.

Mr Mizzi should also note that this approach to "foreigner" is hopelessly outdated in a new reality where Maltese citizens are welcome all over the European Union and where Malta has accepted to extend the same courtesy to all EU citizens.

Finally, Mr Mizzi would have the (wrong) minister "initiate a public inquiry over the way a foreigner was contracted to be the director of the laboratory at MCR, a post which could have been taken up by a Maltese".

The minister may perhaps choose not to accept Mr Mizzi's invitation on account of the following facts:

a) The assistant director responsible for the diagnostic science laboratories at MCR was in point of fact a Maltese citizen who had responded to a public call for applications in 1999 and was loaned to MCR by the University of Malta.

b) When this Maltese citizen returned to his university duties in 2002 an internal call for applications was made at MCR. The only applicant for this post was a non-Maltese (who had been recruited in 2001 following an international call for applications). After eight months in post, the performance of this non-Maltese was found to be unsatisfactory on a number of issues and his employment was terminated.

Mr Mizzi wrongly alleges in his article that "contract conditions stipulated that MCR had to pay the director's remaining lavish salary from the date of his premature dismissal to the remaining years till the expiration of his contract". This is simply not true on a number of counts. The employee's contract in question did not stipulate any such conditions. The issue of termination of a definite contract of service is regulated by Maltese employment law which lays down that when such a contract is terminated the employee is due half the salary still outstanding had he worked until the expiry date of the contract. All that MCR did was observe the law. The employee did not have a "lavish" salary. There were no "remaining years till the expiration of the contract" - there were just 20 months left, so MCR was by law bound to pay 10 months salary on termination and that's what it did.

MCR has no fear of a public inquiry - the findings would only demonstrate to one and all that MCR is one of the best-managed and most successful agencies in the country.

Mr Mizzi claims he is interested in MCR because it lies in his constituency, yet he has never bothered to visit us. We think that if Mr Mizzi were to be fair with MCR and find out for himself what the truth is all about, then he would not make any further allegations.

We take this opportunity to make Mr Mizzi an open, public and standing invitation to make as many visits to MCR as he likes, ask as many questions as he likes, check the provenance of each and every article in our laboratories, talk things through with ourselves.

We think that if Mr Mizzi is genuinely interested in our cultural heritage, then he will truly appreciate MCR's sterling contribution and become one of our greatest allies.

When shall we expect him to visit?

Dr Cannataci is chairman of the Malta Centre for Restoration