Thursday, 27th November 2008 - 13:16CET
Cathedral Museum extension
Pullicino Orlando urged not to pressure MEPA
The president of the St John’s Co-Cathedral Foundation, Mgr Philip Calleja, has strongly denied an allegation made by Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando in Parliament that he was being used as a mouthpiece for someone else.
Mgr Calleja said in a statement he was deeply saddened that Dr Pullicino Orlando chose to speak in Parliament to make false allegations against him.
“In the very many years I have been active in various roles in public life I have never been faced with such unjust and untruthful allegations. This is an uncalled for attack on my personal integrity and on a foundation which works very hard to safeguard one of Malta’s best treasures.
“As President of St John’s Co-Cathedral Foundation it was and still is my duty to defend the hard work and the credibility of the foundation. I would like to assure Dr Pullicino Orlando that I will continue honouring my duties and commitments and I am convinced that finally the truth will prevail,” Mgr Calleja said in a statement.
He said the foundation was equally disappointed by the argument made by Dr Pullicino Orlando that St John’s Co-Cathedral did not deserve the investment the foundation was committed to make to ensure that the Co-Cathedral and its historical surroundings were safeguarded and preserved.
“From the way he spoke in Parliament it is reasonable to conclude that for Dr Pullicino Orlando, the safeguarding, preservation and upkeep of St John’s Co-Cathedral is not a priority. That is a very sad statement to be made by anyone, but coming from an MP, these statements are shocking.”
It was also clear, Mgr Calleja remarked, that Dr Pullicino Orlando was choosing to ignore the explanations given by the foundation after he first spoke about the cathedral in Parliament.
Mgr Calleja reminded Dr Pullicino Orlando that following a public call inviting all Maltese entities to submit proposals for EU funding, the foundation made a detailed and technical submission and €13.798 million, to which the foundation will be adding €2.06 million from its own funds as its co-financing share, were allocated.
Mgr Calleja noted that the foundation would be carrying out an extensive independent Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) under the control of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority.
“The Environmental Impact Assessment will cover all matters of concern such as the underground passages and the excavations of the square. I can assure Dr Pullicino Orlando that the foundation will never expose the Co-Cathedral or any other sites or buildings to any risk.
“Furthermore the Foundation is determined to allow MEPA to carry out its work without any interference or pressure. Dr Pullicino Orlando should do the same and avoid using his position as a Member of Parliament to put pressure on MEPA,” he said.
See also
RSS
Comments
I also feel that for the Mgr to attack JPO 'ad hominem' shows a vulnerable debating position, especially when mentioning Mepa and when claiming that the preservation of the Cathedral was not a priority for JPO, which is an obvious misinterpretation.
I feel that JPO should raise the question of the Ownership of this site in parliament, so that this issue would be settled once and for all, and thus if the government assumes ownership of the site he would be able to stop any development which had not looked at alternative viable sites first.
An interesting read about the question of ownership of the site is the paper written by Mario Buhagiar in Melita Historica http://www.geocities.com/melitahistoricab/19913.html
While it will be difficult to put the Mistra case behind you, standing your ground on such 'extravagant projects' will remind people why they have voted for you after all!
To the foundation, while i have the highest esteem for Mons. Calleja, obviously i cannot say the same for some committee members!
Finally 14 million euros should be utilised on projects that need immediate attention. I understand that this foundation applied for these funds and obtained them on its own steam but as had been suggested we would like to see which projects were refused by the EU which had been proposed by the Government!
I am sure it will be an eye opener!
The last thing I would criticize, is the spending of almost e16 million in this project. In this uncertain economic atmosphere this is what is needed to create jobs in a substantial project which will take several months if not years to bring it to completion.
Another point which is sorely missed by many, is that this project is not mainly for the preservation of the cathedral itself but rather for the preservation of the priceless tapestries and other treasures which, due to inadequate temperature and humidity controlled premises, are being damaged. So, what is the use of spending millions preserving the tapestries when after restoration they will still suffer the ravages from unsuitable facilities?
Thirdly, one gets the impression that the project entails some new unproven methods, which is clearly not the case.
And lastly, someone wrote that EIAs are not to be trusted and that they are a smoke screen! Why then, do we have them? EIAs are used throughout the civilized world, so are they all useless expenditures? And, who is giving the impression that an 'independent EIA' will be conducted by MEPA ? - see comment by S Caruana.
The I.M.Pei parallel has been flogged to death;some French architects recently pointed out that the tiny graveyard to be glassed-over cannot even begin to be compared to the scale of the Louvre forecourt, where the IM Pei pyramid was built.Still less is the Louvre sacred ground.
These arguments overlook the fact that like the rest of Europe,Malta is facing a period of recession and should make every cent work many times over. €16 million could be sunk into restoring one of the many structures that could accommodate the Foundation’s collections, with enough left over to restore St. Angelo and give our shabby capital a facelift which will attract more tourists to Malta and create tourism jobs in depressed areas like lower Valletta and Birgu.By clutching onto all their riches in terms of treasures and EU funding,Government and Church members of the Foundation are being extremely elitist and betraying the people they are answerable to
In fact when we brought up the matter of the Foundation tender which included power water washing which could have a very damaging effect on old stone, causing micro-cracks which would allow water to seep into the Preti wall-paintings,none of the Foundation were even aware of this! Is that how “the foundation will never expose the Co-Cathedral or any other sites or buildings to any risk”
If the Foundation were genuine about this it would heed MEPA’s words that this project is a non-starter as no mitigation measures can completely eliminate the risk to St. John’s,and drop the project in favour of one of the numerous valid alternatives that have by now been made.
A recent Foundation article called the project “What’s best for St.John’s”-that’s exactly it. They are not considering what’s best for Valletta’s people, its heritage, and its long-term sustainability, just tunnel-vision in more ways than one.
However from the technical point of view I have certainly seem more challenging projects all over Europe, York and Grenoble immediately, come to mind
14 million euros is not a large sum and certainly not extravagant if we are going to create a state of the art space worthy of the quality and professionality which such a project deserves.
Indeed when the Hypogeum was rehabilatated a few extra millions in expenditure would have ensured a space capable of accepting a much higher number of visitors without damage to the structure than at present .
Projects like this will always be highly controversial. One remembers the titanic furore when the I.M. Pei pyramid and underground extension to the Louvre was proposed . Now it is considered as one of the wonders of modern France.
EUR14 Million should be used for more important and immediate projects.
I completely agree with Ing. Cremona that the EIA is just a smoke screen - we have seen this happen in the past and i am sorry - WE DO NOT TRUST MEPA!!!!!
Mons. Calleja, think again and try to see how those EUR14 million could assist better the people!
Finally, how the foundation managed to obtain this immense figure baffles me! Probably there was a DIVINE hand! :-)
NGOs I am involved with do not even dream of securing a few thousand euros in EU funds for their very good social and environmental projects, let alone Euro 14 million for what is clealy a very destructive project.
I cannot believe that the St. John's proposal, nonsensical and extravagant as it is, managed to beat other projects submitted by ministries (for education, society, tourism, cultural heritage etc.).
Being on the outside, I do not know what projects were submitted and refused (it would be useful if government were to publish the list), but I really cannot believe that the ministries could not come up with better project ideas than the Foundation's. Why weren't the St. Elmo and St. Angelo restoration projects submitted? Why weren't such more worthy projects in the running against the St. John's proposal?
Indeed, one only needs to look at the composition of the Foundation's committee to speculate whether some other factors, other than merit, were at play here.
"...the safeguarding, preservation and upkeep of St John’s Co-Cathedral..."
This whole project idea is not at all about the safeguarding, preservation and upkeep of St John's, but an extravagant and unnecessary underground extension which will alter the character of the cisterns and sewers built at the time of the Knights. We all know that this extension to the Cathedral Museum is uncalled for because it can be adequately housed elsewhere.
Please let us keep things in their correct perspective and not play around with words.
1. How can he say that the Foundation's project will pose no risk to St. John's Cathedral when the Foundation's architect refused to give such guarantees?
2. Unlike Mgr. Calleja, we have no faith in the EIA process. Given that the studies are paid by the developer, EIAs inevitably are biased in favour of the development. Remember the EIA for the excavation of an engineered-landfill meters away from the Mnajdra temples? And how the 'independent consultants' said that such a massive development just metres away from one of Malta's most priceless monuments would NOT have any impact? Thank God for JPO who waged a battle against his own government's proposal so that we can enjoy these temples today. The EIA is a smoke-screen, nothing else.
3. Mgr. Calleja fails to see that it's not only JPO who's against this extravagant project but practically everybody under the sky. The project as proposed is so nonsensical and arrogantly destructive by design that public opinion is vehemently against it. One just needs to look at the comments hereunder. The Foundation should retract the project immediately and seek more sustainable alternatives.
I’m sure the Foundation will take all necessary precautions to safeguard St John’s when the project is being carried out.
Dr. PO should stick to his argument as he should know better. Keep it clean
Many of us, including the undersigned are behind Dr. JPO's way of thinking.
Let us fill this big gape in Valletta, once and for all, with a befitting project.
joe the plumber
Does he usually do that I wonder?
If there are funds coming from the EU let us put them into good use for the common good but not at the costs of even minimally risking disturbing St. John's. Should something go wrong during the works - and as things are this is inevitable - I shudder to even think of the consequences.
Intervening on St. John;s CC is simply not on Mons. and not because JPO says so but simply because common sense so dictates.
It does not belong to you but to ALL OF US.
Why are you trying to bring down JPO for doing a good thing and speaking out. No other MP has ever done this consistently, as JPO has throughout his political career. That is commendable, rather than something we should speak against. Keep your comments to yourselves, because it seems to me that as far as you are concerned, no one should ever speak against such projects, but keep quiet and let things be... What a Democracy! ... Keep to the subject instead of bringing up OLD news- perhaps your arguments would be more relevant that way! The fact remains that the money could go to restore other assets of our heritage that are in shambles- it is a shame that the government has not realized that there is so much left to be done with the rest of the country's architectural gems. Well done JPO for speaking up, Malta is behind you!
Hands off please Dr Pullicino Orlando - you are merely a migratory bird.
It is hardly the moment to embark on these luxurious! How will it look to the faithful who have been facing inexplicable hardships to run cars, households, schoolings, water and electricity you name it?!
The Religious should be the last persons to push extravagance and should lead by example!