Friday, 30th January 2009
PN MPs disagree on St John's project
'I cannot leave it up to Mepa' - JPO
Former ministers Jesmond Mugliett and Ninu Zammit have expressed serious reservations over the planned extension of the St John's Co-Cathedral Museum in a Nationalist Party parliamentary group meeting earlier this week.
The two MPs, now backbenchers, joined Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando in voicing their disagreement over aspects of the project during their party's parliamentary group meeting on Tuesday.
Party sources said there may be other MPs silently opposing the plans.
Contacted yesterday, Mr Mugliett confirmed he had reservations because he failed "to understand how it (the project) managed to get so much funding when other projects could have been more deserving".
"When I was minister responsible for urban development we had various applications for regeneration, including in Valletta, even from the private sector, but we had the indication that there were little funds available in the budget," Mr Mugliett said.
The meeting was held just before Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi gave notice of a motion that will change Parliament's regular timetable for the first time in some 30 years because of the continuing absence of a pairing agreement. The motion, however, also has the effect of pushing back an Opposition-sponsored debate on the museum to February 11.
The foundation is proposing to extend its museum by excavating new exhibition space beneath the Cathedral primarily to house a series of tapestries which are based on sketches by 17th century artist Peter Paul Ruebens.
The proposal has sparked an outcry from several quarters and there are fears that it could jeopardise the very structure of the cathedral.
Mr Mugliett said he has not taken a final decision on how he will vote on Labour's parliamentary motion asking the government to revoke its support for the project and find alternative buildings to house the museum.
"On Tuesday we only had a brief discussion and Lawrence Gonzi promised the group a debate focused solely on the project. I want to see how the discussion proceeds and listen to his clarifications before I take a final decision," Mr Mugliett said.
The MP who first raised objections to the project in October, Dr Pullicino Orlando, reiterated his disagreement with the foundation's proposal.
"The argument that is being made is that we should leave it up to Mepa (the Malta Environment and Planning Authority)," he told The Times yesterday, expressing serious doubts about the credibility of the process.
"I cannot leave it up to Mepa when the project description statement makes no reference to geological studies to determine the stability of the rock in the area; or when the plans are not readily available to the public".
He said neither could he trust the process when the foundation is refusing to include the study of alternative sites in the Environment Impact Assessment.
"The foundation wants to conduct the EIA to justify its choice, rather than search for the best possible option. This is arrogance, especially when within the cathedral's perimeter there is a big long corridor that is unutilised or when there are available properties across the road," he said. This is not the first time the young MP has had scrapes with his own party over environmental issues, until the last election when he got embroiled in a controversy after Labour exposed an application for an open-air disco which was to be built on land the MP owns in Mistra.
His opposition to the St John's project, in fact, represented the first such high profile stand since that controversy.
Mr Zammit could not be contacted despite several attempts over the past two days but is said by party sources to have questioned the wisdom of allowing a five-storey quarry to be excavated in Valletta.
According to sources, he lamented the fact that heavy trucks would be passing through Valletta's streets on a daily basis, possibly damaging the new expensive paving, which he had overseen as Minister in the last legislature.
During Tuesday's meeting, Dr Gonzi argued that the government could not interfere with a decision of a non-governmental organisation. Mr Mugliett, however, pointed out that the cathedral's foundation is partly made up of government appointees and therefore the decision was partly sanctioned by the administration.
The budget estimates show the foundation receives government funding. In 2007, it got €256,231 with a further €256,000 last year. The budget allocation for this year is just €25,000. The expenditure falls under the capital vote for the Office of the Prime Minister.
RSS
Comments
Will Dr.Lorry Gonzi goes for vote of confidence if these 3 mintoff's goes against his vote ?
Thanks for the insight .. this is the kind of 'unpacking' of local politics we need.
Which one out the six has a link with the EU? :-)
The members of the Council of the Foundation for the year 2007 – 2008 are:
- Mgr Philip Calleja (President)
- Mgr. Lawrence Cachia
- H.E. Mr Richard Cachia Caruana
- Mr Paul A. Attard
- Dr Philip Farrugia Randon
- Mgr Lawrence Mifsud
(as retrieved from http://stjohnscocathedral.com/the-foundation.html on Feb 1st, 2009)
I support ALL members of parlament, for having the courage to go against party politics.
We should refrain from bringing up the argument of past misdeeds by either elected representatives or citizens, and simply judge, if judge we must, on a case by case basis.
We should encourage our elected representatives, and hope that when issues do come up for discussion or vote in Parlament, they would have the courage to talk and vote as their consciousand their electorate dictate.
Quo Vadis indeed!
Just in case Mr Mugliett did not get the gist of your rare insight ...its the same person who thinks he knows it all to such an extent as to tell heritage professionals what to do, the same person who has lost his throne but kept his power, the same person who is now playing with our heritage like a chess piece...does he need more? There is if he still finds it hard...
He's the same persons that has now convinced me that from now on, PL is the way forward. Thank you Mr for all these eye openers...arrogance has also hit the Heritage sector. Dont try uturns on the eve of the EP elections...alot of us have already decided.
Having followed, like so many others, this issue since the day the FAA publicised the MEPA submissions several months ago, it became increasingly apparent that the Church -- in, general -- had in fact taken a different attitude in regard to one of the two proposals at least.
This proposal concerns the siting of a three storey building on the cathedral's graveyard. This proposal appears to have fallen out of favour. The other proposal is entirely a matter for the government to oppose.
The Church can intervene purely on religious grounds. This of course unless there are legal implications, in which case the Church would act as an administrative body within its constitutional rights.
Whether the proposed excavations in front of the cathedral pose an unacceptable risk to the cathedral's foundations is a technical issue, and is ultimately and solely the government's responsibility.
Come on Mr. Mugliett !!! Do WE have to tell you why the project managed to get so much funding ? Do you need to be a genious to guess it?
Can`t Mr. Mugliett make a who is who of the Co-Cathedral Foundation and see whether there is anything in common with who is both in it and at the same time enjoying a highly-paid high profile job in Brussels? Do WE have to tell Mr, Mugliett that maybe the same strategist that "suggested" the cabinet members after having taken leave from his well-paid job to help the party win the election has something to do with it ?
Can on the other hand Mr. Mugliett, Mr Zammit and Mr JPO - a trio who for some reason or another all expected a ministry and ended up empty handed are now against the project ? Is it for the heritage and better use of funds .... or is it a protest against THE foundation member?
No Board is really autonomous unless it is composed of the stake holders themselves as in family businesses. A government board, as a government agency, is appointed to direct the will of the government and authorised to do so... Governments act on behalf of the people and are expected to impose their will on the directors. Devolution of power and responsibility serves to decentralise power however responsibility cannot be delegated. With legal jargon one may find a way to support a different contention but the fact would still remain that the government has to carry the final responsibility and that gives it the right to interfere and impose its will.
I think this is the only method how such issues does not become politicized with regards to blue vs. red. Few of our politicians expertise in dealing with such sensitive projects, therefore the project needs to have full approval of all the members involved in the discussion rather than seeing the Government do everything possible to impose it for the silly reason that it has sufficient funds to do it!
Secondly how can anyone in his right senses approve of an EIA which is being financed by the Foundation itself and is only considering 1 option!! What if the other options are more viable?? What if Valletta and its businesses would suffer less if we restore palaces or use the Cathedral office space??
Thirdly; which excavation project ""forgets"" to have a serious geological study attatched to it?? Are we 100% sure that no excavation works would in any way harm the Co-cathedral ?? And if yes, where's the proof?
Fourthly; Is it true that Mons.Calleja abstained when the vote came infront of the Monsignors themselves??
This project offers more questions than answers!! One thing is for sure; we play with our most precious gem once and we would have lost it forever!!
I agree with you, but if the Church did not consider the destruction it is going to cause to the farmers and continues to build a cemetery, what makes you think that the church will consider the St John disaster project?
N.Grima
On the one hand you criticize the Opposition and then support the Opposition motion.
Moreover, what is best, to go to elections or to destroy national heritage?
Anthony Mercieca
The PL is voicing the opinion of the people as all political parties should be doing. So do you want an Opposition that say OK to everything that is proposed notwithstanding the potential massive damage and destruction of one of OUR main national heritage sites just to satisfy someone whose ego wants to push the project through at all costs?
Are you referring to the 1998 events in Parliament? The PN played their political cards right at that time and the MLP fell for it. The PL are now playing their tramp card, according to you, but we all know that the PN inner opposition will eventually find an excuse and vote with their colleagues to save the Government. This is what you call good governance.
More than 5,000 truck loads being driven in and out of our capital city.....
Cranes swinging heavy loads over St. John,
Excavators digging away for years,
All the construction site workers and materials driven around Valletta for 3 years or 4 years
The seismic effect of the Cathedral,
Simple, just go to San Pawl ta'Targa and see all the damage inflicted on the houses because of the quarrying taking place 500 metres away. You can see how the road cave in and the dust in the air. Now, imagine the disastrous effect the excavation, trucks, dust, etc.. will have on the cathedral and all of Valletta!
It will finally show that some MPs are ready to act in the national interest rather then what their political party always dictate to them
On a more serious note, why is it that as soon as a convenient band-wagon trundles along, certain types forget all about devolution of power and responsibility and start laying down their version of the law? Why appoint Boards, if you're going to impose your own will on them?
Can this project be included in the Opera House project?
Renzo Piano is against the underground parking space as he wishes to keep cars away from our city. Such space can be utilized by the St John' project.
However, I would be far from upset if the Opposition's motion went through... as long as procedures are respected. Several historic cities adopt a fragmented approach to exhibitions (anyone who has been to Pisa knows what I mean), I do not see why we should allow the risk (no matter how small) the whole cathedral collapsing for a few rugs! If it does go through, the method MP Mugliett pointed out is the correct way to go.
I do point out the fact, however, that with or without the project, there will still be a huge quarry in Valletta - right past City Gate... but at least that one's not destroying a priceless building, the Luftwaffe took care of that (and the Unions made sure the Germans would not build it back).
@ vote of confidence... disagreements are part of democracy. If we do this every time we'll end up like the Italians with a gazillion governments a century.
The most important comment made in this article is the declaration by jesmond mugliett that he cannot understand how this project attracted so much EU funds. This shows that even PN mps are smelling something fishy, not onlt the PL regarding this matter.
What the PL is doing at the moment is just feeling the pulse of the public in general and making its constitutional duty: that of safeguarding the interests of this country.
One cannot but recall his mobilisation of the civil population against a cement factory proposed by the country's most powerful contractor (which even government dares not oppose) and his success in stopping the landfill project that would have destroyed what is possibly Malta's most precious monument - the Mnajdra temples.
It seems that JPO relishes in taking on board such difficult challenges - and I am very happy that he does.
Unfortunately we have too many spineless politicians, in both parties, who prefer to be 'yes-men' and are afraid to speak up even when evidence to the contrary is so apparent.
And I particularly pleased to see that other PN backbenchers are now expressing themselves freely on the project and putting forward very valid arguments why government should intervene and put a stop to this most absurd and extravagant project.
Government should henceforth withdraw the funds allocated for this project and use them for more worthy causes.
Mela when there is 'unanimous' approval on something we cry foul and accuse MPs of being Yes Men
But when they healthly disagree we express awe, surprise and amazement!
Hawwadni ha nifhmek!!!!!!!
"The argument that is being made is that we should leave it up to Mepa (the Malta Environment and Planning Authority)," he told The Times yesterday, expressing serious doubts about the credibility of the process.
No wonder he can't trust MEPA, seeing what he managed to get away with! He had tested the system on himself!
A stone's throw away from St. John's, in merchants street are a number of beautiful large palaces which are in serious need of rehabilitation. These palaces are large enough to house the proposed museum for a fraction of the funds the Foundation is prepared to squander on its project. Rehabilitating one of them would be a substantial upgrading of the vicinity of St. Johns.
This project is opposed by The Cathedral's Chapter, the Catholic Church Heritage Commission, Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar, the GRTU, the Valletta Local Council other NGOs and a large number of individuals. Now we also know that a number of MPs are not happy with this project.
games & machiavellian Strategies.....
guess you need to change the 'L' to an 'N'!
JPO, pity you did not acknowledge your mistake over Mistra, it would give yr credibility a lifeline and facilitate general forgiveness.
however you may start redeeming yrself - keep it up - show that some politicians are not spineless after all.
Govt should attach a vote of confidence to the project's approval in parliament. Who knows, perhaps we'll have a repeat of what happened in 1998.
Jolly fun!!!
This is not a question of PL or PN – this is question of protecting a unique masterpiece.
Both JPO and Mr. Zammit’s arguments are correct – fancy a 5 storey quarry in the middle of Valletta!!
What about the inevitable damage that will be done to the underground engineering marvels created by the builders so many hundreds of years go?
Can you imagine the damage to the streets and their foundations, with all the heavy plant equipment such a project will require – how can anyone think that this is a good idea!!
Regarding your comment on PL’s intentions, what do you expect an Opposition party, in any country, to do – speak only when it is in agreement with a Government proposal? Is this the democracy you wish for our country?
Problem solved, I think.
I SMELL A RAT!
To JPO, well done! In life everyone makes mistakes but we have to learn from them and make sure they are not repeated. It seems you are back on track. Well done!
We had lost our faith in you but it seems that you can gain our trust once again!
While I agree that more space is needed to exhibit better the treasures of St John's co-cathedral there is one thing which is not clear to me. How will this extension ease the heavy flow of tourists in the co-cathedral itself (thus preserving its fabric better) as long as the two elements are not separated, and a visit to one is not distinct from a visit to the other?
Perhaps this has been taken into consideration, but if so, it has not been made clear to the general public.
As for Dr. Gonzi, I think his stand, that Government should not interfere in the decision of a non-government organisation, is a very dangerous position to take.
No serious Government can sit back and let others decide on a matter of national interest.
What a shame!