Discoveries at Mdina

In trying to defend himself against accusations that were written about him in a letter to The Times by a certain Paul Pace, the Superintendent of Cultural Heritage, Tony Pace, tried to take credit when it was not due and tried to pass on his responsibility to others. I cannot allow the inaccuracies that were written in the article Archaeological Discoveries at Mdina and Marsa to remain uncorrected.

In the first place the Mdina paving project (as is the Marsa project) is one of the major projects of the Ministry for Resources and Infrastructure. The Mdina Rehabilitation Project, of which I am executive coordinator, is an integral part of this ministry.

Furthermore we have the assistance of the Mdina Rehabilitation Committee, chaired by Denis de Lucca, which has the responsibility of advising us on our work. As a civil servant Tony Pace should know how projects function and there was no need therefore for him to single me out as the person responsible.

I also wish to clarify immediatedly that the Superintendence did not undertake archaeological excavations at Mdina. These excavations were all done by the Archaeological Services Cooperative (ASC), as commissioned to do so by this office. Both the 2000/2001 excavations and the ones done this year were done by the cooperative. Contrary to what Mr Pace states, the excavations this year were done in St Paul Square and not in Cathedral Square (which is different).

When the Mdina paving project was proposed and planned we knew from the start that both in the phase of the removal of overhead wiring and in the case of the paving project itself we would be coming across archaeological remains. It is with this in mind that we had approached ASC to conduct monitoring while the work was being done.

When it was necessary, or requested by the Superintedence, we went beyond monitoring and did actual excavations at considerable financial cost. In the first phase all the initiatives were taken by us and no written request had been received by the Superintendence.

Nathaniel Cutajar was often on site to give his advice. In this last phase, after some excavations were done, we did get an order, on May 3, from Mr Pace to undertake further excavations and also to cover up immediatedly after the documentation was done. (He certainly did not wait for any proposal from our architects).

Mr Pace referred to the important (2000) finds in Villegaignon Street. There was no intention to keep these visible due to the position of these finds, at an important junction. At no stage were we told by the archaeologists that they had turned green or that there was algae infestation.

But maybe Mr Pace was referring to the other important finds in St Paul Square where a temporary shelter (as approved by Mepa) was placed as the archaeologists had demanded more time for study. Mr Pace states that his office never received proposals for covers. This is not true. In June 2002 we presented a proposal (PA 03308/02) for a cover for these finds in St Paul Square: this application was suspended as his department never responded to the Planning Authority's various requests for their opinion on the proposal over a period of many months. When enquiring over the matter I was told that the Superintendence would meet us but they never did!

I will not go into the question of whether it is correct or not to cover the important finds that were uncovered in Mdina, nor into the other matters raised by Paul Pace. But on a personal note I must state that in my personal professional work abroad all cities try to retain and expose some of the archaeological remains that are found.

In ending I will not do as he did and state that he is personally responsible but certainly that while this office is responsible, on behalf of the Ministry, for the paving works, the responsibility for the archaeological finds rests only with the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage.