Safety standards

The president of the Chamber of Architects, David Pace, said (February 28) that "The Chamber of Architects cannot but agree with Mepa's statement, in that compliance with health and safety regulations is the remit of the Health and Safety Authority and not Mepa".

It is not the intention of the Occupational Health and Safety Authority (OHSA) to shift the responsibility onus around, nor to get tangled in the debate regarding the mudslide in Xemxija, particularly as to which entity should have legal remit for safety.

I could not, however, ignore the fallacy of this statement particularly since in no media report was Mepa quoted as having said this, as verified to the OHSA by Mepa itself.

Indeed, Mepa spokesman Sylvana Debono was reported as saying (January 31) that Mepa "does not enter into third party rights which are safeguarded by law. The architects... are liable for the safety of the site".

Moreover, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister George Pullicino has clearly outlined in Parliament who is responsible for the various aspects of site safety. Mr Pullicino was quoted as saying (February 9) that Mepa "was not responsible for the safety of structures belonging to third parties. This responsibility rested on those who carried out the works and their architect".

The various pieces of legislation from which this emanates were mentioned, most specifically the Code of Police Laws, clause 103(1) which lays down that: "The owner shall be held responsible for any contravention of the provisions of articles 97 and 100 or of any regulations made under the last preceding article unless an architect or mason has been entrusted with the execution of the work, and the contravention is not due to an act of the owner, in which case the architect or mason, or both, as the case may be, shall be held responsible".

The same Code mentions various other instances such as in clause 97.1 (0) (ii): "where, in the opinion of the Superintendent of Public Health, the work proposed to be carried out is such as to require technical direction in order to prevent, during or after the execution of the work, injury to property or danger to the men employed on the work or to passers-by or other persons, it shall be lawful for the said Superintendent of Public Health to require a written declaration by an architect assuming the direction and responsibility of the work, saving in all cases any civil or criminal liability of any other person, according to law".

Clause 97.1 (q) (iii): "the advice of the Director of Public Works given under the last preceding sub-paragraph shall not affect the liability of the architect or of any other person in respect of the stability or safety of the house".

These clauses are far from exhaustive. It is interesting how Mr Pace interpreted the above as being the responsibility of the OHSA!

Mr Pace is in fact aware of which safety issues the OHSA has the remit to enforce, particularly given that a seminar for architects and civil engineers was organised by the OHSA last year in collaboration with the Chamber of Architects to explain in detail the legal obligations involved.

These stem specifically from Legal Notice 281 of 2004 which, during the course of last year, was the subject of a campaign entitled Building In Safety which saw the execution of a series of seminars and workshops targeting different stakeholders, among others.

This legal notice, together with other occupational health and safety legislation, offer scope for intervention from the part of architects, should willingness be there.

The OHSA is aware of its duties and does not shy away from them, in spite of its limited resources. We are aware that unsafe practices are rife and action from our end is being taken as necessary. This has also included, in rare instances, the unpopular decision to close down a workplace until the hazards to the lives of workers are minimised or eliminated.

It is preoccupying how the current debate does not lay enough importance to the role architects play in the safety of building operations. This can be done primarily at the design stage to ensure that planned buildings are safe and substitute high risk aspects with more safe features. Naturally, during the actual construction or excavation stage, architects must carry out adequate supervision of the work carried out to ensure that this is being done according to their specifications. One must, of course, not forget the ethical aspects involved in carrying out one's professional duty.

It is only through concerted action that the standard of safety in Malta will be raised, and this necessitates that everyone shoulders one's responsibilities in their wide definition.

Dr Gauci is CEO of the Occupational Health and Safety Authority.