BirdLife accuses minister of using hotel owner's report
BirdLife yesterday accused Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt of presenting a document commissioned by Seabank Hotel owner Silvio Debono to prove that the existing road in Għadira was contributing to the bay's erosion.
It said government officials and non-governmental organisations agreed this was not a scientific survey and proper studies focusing on the coastal geomorphology of the bay were needed.
BirdLife insisted that if erosion was taking place, this had be backed by scientific studies before the ministry decided whether or not it needed to eliminate the existing thoroughfare.
BirdLife president Joseph Mangion said: "It is very clear that Dr Gatt does not have any scientific evidence and is so desperate that he relies on a document that was paid for and prepared for the Seabank Hotel owner."
BirdLife executive director Tolga Temuge said that while an environment impact assessment would consider the impact of the ministry's proposal, it would not address the question of whether the project was necessary in the first place.
The ministry said BirdLife's stance that the Malta Environment and Planning Authority should reject the government's application without waiting for the EIA was "the height of arrogance".
The ministry maintained that BirdLife's statement was a hostile attempt at shooting the messenger and ignoring the message.
BirdLife's position was "particularly surprising", the ministry said, given that up to yesterday it had complained no studies had been conducted. The ministry said that when a study was produced, BirdLife shot the messenger, implying the research was wrong because it was commissioned by Seabank's owner.
Using the same reasoning, it said, BirdLife's own statements should also be questioned because it was a directly-interested party. The ministry reiterated it was willing to abandon its application should the EIA turn out to be against the development.
Meanwhile, Labour environment spokesman Leo Brincat said the government had clearly raised the issue to divert the public's attention from the higher water and electricity tariffs.
If this were a serious government it would have said whether studies had been made to indicate if the bay was eroding. Mr Brincat questioned how ethical it was for Dr Gatt to say the government would forge ahead with its plans in the presence of the environmental consultant who had prepared the strategic assessment for Seabank Hotel.
5 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mark Mangion
Dec 14th 2008, 09:11
To my own party. You make me sick. This is not why I voted you in.
J.Bonnici
Dec 13th 2008, 16:57
Stick to the PC Austin.
Joseph Cauchi
Dec 13th 2008, 15:36
Why all this fuss, because an interested party in this issue, happened to promote this proposal?
What is important is, if this proposal makes any sense.
If it is in the affirmative, then it’s good or if it’s otherwise then it’s bad.
A proposal must be judged by its substance and not by its appearance!
A mature argument must be discussed by mature people.
../..
Criss Camilleri
Dec 13th 2008, 10:58
As if this Hotel owner is going to produce a report that would go against his own needs & profits!
Minister, why not spend this amount of money for re-building the majority of our shameful roads/streets around the whole Island.
lgalea
Dec 13th 2008, 10:06
Now we are really seeing who has the proverbial finger in the pie and in whose interests the new road is being proposed.
How else can Gonzipn et al take care of friends and friends of friends?