Socks and decent roadworks
Austin Gatt, the minister in charge of the infrastructure, is a blunt person, sometimes far too much so for someone in his position, though there have been similar models on both sides of the political spectrum in the past. But his bluntness in the...
Austin Gatt, the minister in charge of the infrastructure, is a blunt person, sometimes far too much so for someone in his position, though there have been similar models on both sides of the political spectrum in the past. But his bluntness in the case this column deals with was more than justified.
Dr Gatt said that he "deems it unacceptable" for the Malta Transport Authority (which is in charge of building roads) or for local councils to pursue a policy of accepting low-quality work simply because it is provided by the bidder with the cheapest offer. "Minimum published quality standards should be the basic and only acceptable benchmark for tendering" (The Times, September 22).
The minister thundered his prescription when announcing that new roads are to be independently tested. He was referring to a batch of 37 new residential roads to be built in 10 towns. The Infrastructure Ministry said in a statement that the works will follow road-testing directives issued by it to the Malta Transport Authority (ADT) in April.
The directives stipulate that the quality of the works must be certified in independent laboratories before any final payment is issued to contractors. The Times recalled that in April Minister Gatt had said that although quality tests were required on newly constructed or extensively refurbished roads, these were being carried out by the contractor at testing facilities chosen by the contractor himself rather than by the transport watchdog.
Under previous regulations, road contractors carried out quality tests on roads they had worked on themselves. Dr Gatt said these used "very inferior" end-products for patching, a detail which he pointed out in the new set of directives issued to the transport authority.
The state of Malta's roads is now a byword for a mixture of comic description (moon surface) and angry complaints. The citizenry is disgusted. Tourists tolerate the roads because they think they are quaint. For years new roads have not escaped from justified criticism. Roads laid 20 to 30 years ago are almost back to the state of dirt tracts. New roads laid 10 to 15 years ago will not be much better in 10 years' time. Already, a number of them are opening up.
Roads constructed by the UK Services Departments when Malta was a military base, well before that political state ended 29 years ago, bear up better to extensive use than roads built after 1979 by various administrations. If new roads are a sound and ready cause for complaints, road repair is a disaster.
It is not that, despite the ancient presence in Malta of those famous road builders of the Roman empire, we never learnt how to build roads. The new roads laid under British services supervision were built by Maltese contractors. As for repairs, private estates and the odd road here and there demonstrate that where there is a will such work can be done satisfactorily.
The problem cannot be traced to lack of funds. For decades the annual public budget has carried allocations to road building and repair averaging €25 million. That was so even before Italian and pre-EU accession funds became available. The atrocious result was due to a huge lack of willingness by contractors to work properly and efficiently, and to equally lack of political will to impose basic conditions by the administrations of the day.
There was a great deal of political huffing and puffing, but far from enough enforcement of basic control on the quality of work carried out in building new roads or repairing old ones. The result was that taxpayers did not get value for money out of the chunks of taxes they paid spent on roadworks.
To this day, even the roads built over the last five years are not really up to full scratch, not least because the road markings have all but disappeared from them as well.
Contractors sometimes point out to the type of basic materials they are allowed to use in surfacing roads as the essential reason for the fact that roadworks do not stand up to the test of early time. They may have a point, but not enough so to explain the way money spent on roadworks did not yield a proper return in terms of quality.
It is interesting to note that the directives published by the Infrastructure Ministry in April did not raise much reaction, whether in terms of media comment, or in terms of expressions of opinions by our contractors. They took the directives in their stride, perhaps comfortable in the knowledge that once it came to testing the ADT would not have healthy teeth to bite with.
If all that does change in accordance with Dr Gatt's decree, bully for him. Enough money has been wasted on dud roadworks. There is a substantial roadworks programme ahead. It should not be done on the same basis that roadworks have been carried out since Malta became independent. Proper testing should make contractors pull up their socks. We have wasted enough public funds in this sector.
Dr Gatt said that he "deems it unacceptable" for the Malta Transport Authority (which is in charge of building roads) or for local councils to pursue a policy of accepting low-quality work simply because it is provided by the bidder with the cheapest offer. "Minimum published quality standards should be the basic and only acceptable benchmark for tendering" (The Times, September 22).
The minister thundered his prescription when announcing that new roads are to be independently tested. He was referring to a batch of 37 new residential roads to be built in 10 towns. The Infrastructure Ministry said in a statement that the works will follow road-testing directives issued by it to the Malta Transport Authority (ADT) in April.
The directives stipulate that the quality of the works must be certified in independent laboratories before any final payment is issued to contractors. The Times recalled that in April Minister Gatt had said that although quality tests were required on newly constructed or extensively refurbished roads, these were being carried out by the contractor at testing facilities chosen by the contractor himself rather than by the transport watchdog.
Under previous regulations, road contractors carried out quality tests on roads they had worked on themselves. Dr Gatt said these used "very inferior" end-products for patching, a detail which he pointed out in the new set of directives issued to the transport authority.
The state of Malta's roads is now a byword for a mixture of comic description (moon surface) and angry complaints. The citizenry is disgusted. Tourists tolerate the roads because they think they are quaint. For years new roads have not escaped from justified criticism. Roads laid 20 to 30 years ago are almost back to the state of dirt tracts. New roads laid 10 to 15 years ago will not be much better in 10 years' time. Already, a number of them are opening up.
Roads constructed by the UK Services Departments when Malta was a military base, well before that political state ended 29 years ago, bear up better to extensive use than roads built after 1979 by various administrations. If new roads are a sound and ready cause for complaints, road repair is a disaster.
It is not that, despite the ancient presence in Malta of those famous road builders of the Roman empire, we never learnt how to build roads. The new roads laid under British services supervision were built by Maltese contractors. As for repairs, private estates and the odd road here and there demonstrate that where there is a will such work can be done satisfactorily.
The problem cannot be traced to lack of funds. For decades the annual public budget has carried allocations to road building and repair averaging €25 million. That was so even before Italian and pre-EU accession funds became available. The atrocious result was due to a huge lack of willingness by contractors to work properly and efficiently, and to equally lack of political will to impose basic conditions by the administrations of the day.
There was a great deal of political huffing and puffing, but far from enough enforcement of basic control on the quality of work carried out in building new roads or repairing old ones. The result was that taxpayers did not get value for money out of the chunks of taxes they paid spent on roadworks.
To this day, even the roads built over the last five years are not really up to full scratch, not least because the road markings have all but disappeared from them as well.
Contractors sometimes point out to the type of basic materials they are allowed to use in surfacing roads as the essential reason for the fact that roadworks do not stand up to the test of early time. They may have a point, but not enough so to explain the way money spent on roadworks did not yield a proper return in terms of quality.
It is interesting to note that the directives published by the Infrastructure Ministry in April did not raise much reaction, whether in terms of media comment, or in terms of expressions of opinions by our contractors. They took the directives in their stride, perhaps comfortable in the knowledge that once it came to testing the ADT would not have healthy teeth to bite with.
If all that does change in accordance with Dr Gatt's decree, bully for him. Enough money has been wasted on dud roadworks. There is a substantial roadworks programme ahead. It should not be done on the same basis that roadworks have been carried out since Malta became independent. Proper testing should make contractors pull up their socks. We have wasted enough public funds in this sector.