Church sounds off on excessive bombi noise

People are always accosting me and telling me to keep up the pressure and not let my campaign against the dreaded 'bombi' die down. Last week, I referred briefly to the over-loud thunder and lightening effects by our pyrotechnics, expected in the coming season in my "cacophonic bedlam" column.

As readers will know, noise pollution is one of my recurring themes. I happened to come across a piece I wrote in August 1994, which might amuse you.

I had suggested that perhaps the Health Education Unit, which was then raising awareness on the damage caused by the sun, could issue guidelines on the harmful effects of loud noise.

Something on the lines of:

Avoid living anywhere in Malta. If that cannot be avoided, sleep between 2 and 5 a.m., if you work nights give up sleeping altogether - it is less stressful than fruitless attempts at catching naps between the lulls; avoid homes with a view - the surrounding open space is bound to be the next building site; get rid of your TV set - you can only listen to one programme at a time, and your neighbour's is louder.

But back to today. On Thursday night I could hear distant 'thunder', but, thankfully, it was not loud enough to keep me from falling asleep.

But, five years ago I had written extensively and repeatedly about the problem of the constant summer bombardment we have to put up with. I had received hundreds of letters in support, which culminated in a petition, signed by about a thousand people, presented to the House of Representatives.

The main message of the campaign was that: "the exaggerated noise pollution produced by the bombi, which is detrimental to everyone but especially the sick, elderly and the dying, should be curbed."

Despite some meetings with politicians, the House did nothing. I had also met with Archbishop Mercieca at the Curia and he had been very interested in the campaign and in what I had to say.

He agreed that something should be done about the undue suffering to vulnerable people such as children and the elderly, the sick and the dying.

And maybe, because of Parliament's inaction, although he might have done it anyway, he set up an Environmental Commission within the Curia, which in turn commissioned a study, which analysed the effects of fireworks and the waste generated during feasts, whose findings were released on Friday.

ENT consultants formed part of the study team and tests, which yielded 5,000 recordings, were held from Thursday to Sunday at all the times the fireworks were let off.

Its chairman, Professor Victor Axiak, said that the results on the level of noise from fireworks showed that "although average firework noise is not at a level that is damaging to health, in certain cases the levels went well over the accepted limits.

"This is, especially, applicable when cracker shells (murtali tal-beraq, what I call 'thunder and lightning') are used. These are nearly four times more powerful than colour shells (murtali tal-kulur), and have about double the power of maroons and bombi tas-salut." The latter have 21 repeat bangs.

The study also established that about 200 tons of chemicals a year are used to produce fireworks. These include a considerable amount of sulphur, potassium chlorate and potassium nitrate.

However, further studies are needed to establish how much air pollution the feasts are causing.

The Commission said that the time has come for stronger regulations that controlled fireworks in our country. These should include limits of how many and what type of 'bombs' and petards can be hoisted at any given time as well as the level of noise permitted.

It suggests that there should be a reduction in the number and intensity of cracker shells because the study showed clearly that they were the loudest.

It is also suggesting that the criteria for granting licences for firework 'factories' should be tougher and that they should be closely monitored so that anyone who broke the rules would lose their licence. It also suggested that every place used for the manufacture of fireworks should have a Health and Safety Officer.

Along with the study the Curia has issued a postcard with a beautiful fireworks visual, a prayer and a message on the reverse stating:

"The religious feasts of our towns and villages form an important part of our lives and culture. However, did you know that: During the last nine years 14 people died and 38 were injured through injuries caused by fireworks (these rates are higher than elsewhere in the Mediterranean). Nineteen per cent of the dead and injured were aged 16 or less.

"That the noise caused by fireworks is in certain cases excessive and can cause damage to people's and animals' health. This applies particularly to the cracker shells (murtali tal-beraq) notorious for their powerful blast.

"That 200 tons of chemicals a year are used to produce fireworks. A study to establish what impact these chemicals are having on air pollution is needed.

"Feasts generate around 450 tons of solid waste a year. This amounts to 27 per cent of all the rubbish picked off our streets in a year."

It concludes with "Everyone's co-operation is needed to make our feasts even more beautiful, while avoiding excesses to witness better our Christian beliefs."

These cards will be distributed within all the parishes, so there is no better way to get the message across. Let's hope our politicians take note this time round.

Kazin of yore, indeed

I am afraid that Ms Syvana Debono has either got her whatsits in a twist, or she is intent on perpetuating an atmosphere of mistrust when responding in defence of MEPA failings.

She claims that the people I referred to in my column last week "could not be considered as registered objectors".

Yet, in February 2004 the MEPA Director of Planning wrote to the objectors concerned stating: "We enclose for your information a copy of the decision notice relating to the development application on which you made representation".

The decision taken by the DCC in February 2004 was a refusal to the planning permit. (I have copies of all this).

So it looks like they were seen as registered objectors after all. The fact that they complained that the PA Application Notice was only affixed to the premises concerned two days before the deadline, i.e. December 12, 2003, in their letter, might have had some bearing on this.

Furthermore, the letter I quoted last week was sent to the objectors last April, when the objectors found out that after all the reasons the DCC had previously given for refusal, which had been transmitted to the objectors in February 2004, and verbally on following occasions, much later it changed its mind and granted the permit.

And now Ms Debono tells us the permit was eventually granted on the grounds that "the Internet café was now considered similar to the kazini of yore" and "a planning gain to the equivalent of three parking spaces was levied".

Now I hope readers understand the latter quote, because I don't. Why can't MEPA use plain language that we can all understand, instead of mystifying us with legalese and jargon.

As to the former, how can you compare the noise emitted from a "kazin of yore" to an Internet café, not to mention the fact that not only have community populations grown, but also people now use cars even to travel to their corner shop?

Besides, those two reasons should not invalidate the original grounds of refusal, which gave the "deleterious impact on the amenity of the area and of existing adjoining uses by virtue of noise, additional traffic generation and operating times." In fact they contradict them.

Protecting our zones

Among the many e-mails I plough through each day, this was one of the more persistent. "One of the sites earmarked to be included within the development zone, is Il-Qortin ta' Barra, Mellieha.

"This area has always been a green area, enjoyed by all who live in Ta' Bragg and Qortin. Farmers work part of the land, while the rest is wild, and home to a large number of carob trees.

"We need to protect what beautiful area of country side still remains, especially this one which is of great scenic and environmental value. Selmun Palace is a stone's throw away and any development here will be significant to the visual impact of the area surrounding the Fort.

"As residents of the area and citizens of Malta we strongly oppose any attempt to spoil this..."

Everyone is up in arms about the new development zones. We have so few open spaces that we are right to fight to protect the little we have.

The Gozo Alternattiva Demokratika seems to have taken this cause on board, as well as many more. In fact Gozo AD seem to be growing in strength day by day. But please stop sending me all the copies of your e-mails; you are driving me to distraction.

phansen@timesofmalta.com