'No choice' but to abandon project - Cachia Caruana

Anthony Mizzi

Feb 13th 2009, 21:10

Why drag the Archbishop in? It was only Dr. Gonzi 'who had no choice' but to stop the underground museum project to save face, by popular demand.

"Fliemkien with Joseph Muscat and various NGOs, formost amongst which Ghaqda ghal-Amjent ahjar, Kollox possibli "

Lawrence Bonello

Feb 13th 2009, 19:47

Remember Mr Cachia Caruana! The Titanic was built by professionals whereas amateurs built the Ark!!

lgalea

Feb 13th 2009, 17:30

F Cachia
It is your Gonezipn and RCC that have to answer, no FAA and all those who saved OUR national heritage from destruction by the so called professionals.

"Contacted yesterday, none of the six foundation board members felt he should resign after the project they have pursued for about two years was permanently shelved by the Prime Minister and the Archbishop."

SIMPLY ARROGANCE UNLIMITED.

Alfred Falzon

Feb 13th 2009, 17:19

Philip Farrugia Randon, Richard Cachia Caruana and Paul Attard deserve our full respect for their work as members of the Foundation.

@ Philip Pace re “So according to RCC, a good decision is always taken by professionals”.
Do you seek advice from your next door butcher before undergoing surgery?

Brian Caruana

Feb 13th 2009, 15:38

Well done to the Gov, Archbishop and the Opposition for not allowing the distruction of our jewel, St John's Co-Cathedral. Very big thank you goes to the Hon Jeffery Pullicino Orlando. I have big faith in him and I being a culture, environment & history lover know that I when I voted him into parliament, was a very good move. Now I am feeling much better, since this assurdity is finished once & for all. Mr RCC, there is no need for proffesionals to tell that a 4 storey deep hole, makes alot of damadge to the Cathedral!! Please continue with the magnificent job that you are doing to restore St John's not ruining it & for what eh?!!

Joe Tabone-Adami

Feb 13th 2009, 15:32

In this instance, resignation would have amounted to the (in)famous "NON SERVIAM". None of the Foundation members, almost all of whom I have known personally for years, would ever entertain adopting this attitude.

Astrid Vella

Feb 13th 2009, 14:18

For further expert input Peter Gatt,the highly respected geologist reported: "If excavation exposes a sizeable joint(rock fissure)oriented in a particular direction,an entire wedge of rock may fail,causing catastrophic damage to the Cathedral.There have been several instances when this happened in Malta,e.g.during excavation of Sliema car park,in Bugibba,when a woman died buried under rubble etc Globigerina Limestone is a soft rock and may deform in a brittle as well as ductile manner. Even if we are spared mass failure,creating a void will alter stresses in the rock and cause slow deformation which will increase damage to the Cathedral structure in the form of tension cracks(kunsenturi)in the church.This may ruin MattiaPreti's vault paintings. The excavation will alter the local hydrology ie.pathways taken by rain water in rock and may result in a localised temporary build up of water along the walls of the completed(damp sealed)underground structure.This increase in humidity will be disastrous for the Cathedral, causing increased salt crystallisation" I believe that is expert evidence enough of the Foundation's irresponsibility in concealing their risky project from the public and doing everything they could to press ahead with it, irrespective of the risks that had been flagged up for years.

Astrid Vella

Feb 13th 2009, 14:10

RCC is actually to put his project above the law:by saying that the studies should have gone ahead he's overriding the fact that the Cathedral is a Scheduled Grade 1 monument, therefore NO STRUCTURAL CHANGES CAN BE MADE – ie,none of the lift shafts or new underground passages being proposed. He is also overlooking the fact that the decision on St. John's WAS taken by the experts: the MEPA Integrated Heritage Management Unit,MEPA Heritage Advisory Committee,MEPA Directorate,Church Commission for Cultural Heritage,The Cathedral Chapter of Monsignors, Valletta & Floriana Rehabilitation Committee. How many more experts than that does he need. As regards the mention of only 1,500 petitioners, may I point out that is not the final figure but the number of those who signed on in just one week.The signatures are in fact still pouring in. A more realistic though of course not conclusive assessment would be that of our signature collecting session at City Gate. Out of 275 individuals approached, 25 declined to sign, ie: 91% were against the Cathedral project and 9% in favour. I believe that indicates that an overwhelming majority of the public were against the project.

J Martinelli

Feb 13th 2009, 13:33

"coz all the men in the street that the planning process is flawed from beginning to end and the no one with an independent mind has a trust in the planning process" - just shows the narrowness of one's mind. How was the planning process flawed from beginning to end when the end was never allowed to come?! "'Philip Farrugia Randon and Paul Attard, dismissed any notion of resigning,'. They would be fools if they do....and lose income just for being blue eyed". - Another revelation - both will go to the poorhouse if their 'income' from the Foundation was to cease! So according to RCC all the entitties against this project are lead by amateurs". Since when is telling the truth arrogant? Most of the comments, so far are politically biased. As I commented in yesterday's paper, the normal procedures of approving or otherwise of the project have been effectively vitiated and we will never know whether the opponents of the project had any legs to stand on. Indeed, empty vessels, make most sound.

A Fabri

Feb 13th 2009, 13:29

RCC stated that it is "sad" when decisions are not allowed to be taken by professionals. ....hmmmm same professionals that are ruining a country, all for money sake!! Yes Yes the the majority of the maltese have lost their faith in our professionals messed up in this farce political satire.

Francesca Abela

Feb 13th 2009, 13:22

No, Mr. / Ms. V. Micallef - RCC is not the only person in Malta who is sad. There are many other who are disappointed at the way things turned out. The project should have first been the subject of a serious study and then a decision taken.

Catherine Zammit

Feb 13th 2009, 13:22

I would have expected the Foundation to issue an official statement to the press on this matter following the recent developments, instead of hearing disjointed opinions from a number of its members which have been left open to misinterpretation. I do not feel I am enough informed about this project since it requires too many complex considerations which are best left to our architects and historians to assess. I am sure that a lot of effort and work has gone into this project by the Foundation and it is a pity that it was politicised in such a negative manner. Perhaps in future we should consider having a nation-wide referendum on such major projects so that the general public is provided with the details of the projects in a structured and informed manner.

M Xuereb

Feb 13th 2009, 12:33

Hey guys please give the man a break! I myself was hesitant about this whole project, admittedly, since there are a good number of pros and cons for which I'm not qualified to weigh let alone pass judgement over. And that is exactly what RCC is saying: he is not the professional himself, it's the people conducting the EIA that are (or should be) professional and that, he claims, have not been allowed to do their job objectively. But that's where the problem lies, really. How qualified are these people? How independent ? Would the EIA have been truly objective, or would it have been influenced by those who would have liked the project to pass through come what may? It all boils down to perception - how things/processes are SEEN TO BE, irrespective of whether they are or not. In view of all this I guess that is why the Maltese man-in-the-street - the true "owner" of these treasures - is sceptical about "projects" like these. I, for one, am glad it hasn't passed through, precisely because I'm not convinced a proper objective appraisal would have been conducted. It's partly MY inheritance we're talking about, after all.

martin portelli

Feb 13th 2009, 12:15

Pray tell which one of the government appointed board members is a 'professional' art historian, museumologist or architect? The state of the art is in fact 'dilettantism' rather than professionalism!

Joseph Cauchi

Feb 13th 2009, 11:11

Should we congratulate the FAA for their vociferous protests in succeeding to shoot down this project or cry? Was this saga beneficial to Malta? I would like to hear the comments from experts and professionals and not from Cikku l-Poplu! By the way, what about the opinion of the SILENT majority? Or is it a question of “EMPTY VESSELS MAKE MORE SOUND”! Quo Vadis Malta? ../..

albert spiteri

Feb 13th 2009, 10:59

Mr. Richard Cachia Caruana says it's a pity decisions are not taken by professionals. I am most certain he was talking about policy decisions - and of course the expert RCC refers to here is HE. What they miss in this case is that this is one of those few instances in which the Maltese, as a people, were totally united - against the Foundation's decision to dig a 16 million euro hole right in front and under the co-cathedral. The only disunity was within the PN parliamentary group. But maybe for the foundation board members the PN and the people are the same. The 51/% of the voting population who voted against the PN in the 2008 elections count for less than naught.

R Agius

Feb 13th 2009, 10:58

Arrogance is the way the FAA hijacked the whole process instead of allowing rational, informed debate based on expert findings. There is an assumption that the whole island was against the project. This is very far from the truth. Only 1,500 people and a handful of NGOs put up their hand. The PL and AD simply jumped on the bandwagon as it was politically expedient. We have been denied due process on a project that has merits if the integrity of the cathedral was guaranteed. Hearsay and amateurs voicing their personal opinion does not constitute the informed opinion we, as a nation, deserved.

Anthony Briffa

Feb 13th 2009, 10:56

What a surprise. All the members of the foundation will not be resigning as the decision by the Prime Minster and the Archbishop to abandon the project “did not equate to a lack of trust in them”. Where is the cut off line in Malta between trust and lack of trust? The chairman of the foundation has defended the project against one and all and even went to extreme lengths to counter the points raised by the NGO’s and individuals who were opposed to the project. It is a known fact that when he was defending the project and refuting all alternative suggestions he was doing it in the name of the whole foundation. Supposedly the project did not present a safety problem to the Co-cathedral; the foundation has forgotten the consequences such a project would have had on the residents, the business community and visitors/tourists during its construction period. In my humble opinion, yes the members of the foundation have lost the trust of the Maltese people and they should all go either through an en-block resignation or be removed by both government and the church.

Eric Soames

Feb 13th 2009, 10:55

Thank goodness. Digging a deep pit in the middle of town was a hare-brained scheme and I think they should resign to prevent any future folly.

m attard

Feb 13th 2009, 10:40

So according to RCC all the entities against this project are lead by amateurs.
Only he and the people surrounding him know what's best for Malta and are professional. All we common mortals should stay put and be led by the nose.

V.Micallef

Feb 13th 2009, 10:34

Mr Richard Cachia Caruana seems to be the only sad person in all of Malta over the decision to drop such a preposterous project. Oh, for speaking out loud. Such arrogance! Such pretensions! This debacle should serve as an eye-opener to the electorate regarding the nature, attitude, approach and MIND FRAME of the current Government! It should be an eye-opener also to GonziPN. As things turned out, he was shown to be as knowledgeable on restoration projects as he is on quantum physics.

philip pace

Feb 13th 2009, 10:14

"However, Mr Cachia Caruana, a government representative on the foundation's board and Malta's Permanent Representative to the EU, lamented that it is "sad" when decisions are not allowed to be taken by professionals."

So according to RCC, a good decision is always taken by professionals.

Maybe that is why there are so many problems in the world, especially the UK deepest recession as the decisions were taken by professionals who get paid extremely well for the world record bungling and come up like schoolboys apologizing in fron of the headmaster.

I think that he has bungled with this statement as he is clearly stating that those involved with this positive decision were just a bunch of amatuers whilst he was 'professionally' right.

F Cachia

Feb 13th 2009, 10:13

The FAA have much to answer for. Let us hope we do not have a repeat when the plans for the Valletta entrance are revealed. The silent majority have as much right to their opinion as the loud minority that the 1,500 signature petition represents. My appeal is that we allow due process to come to a conclusion before scuttling a project to appease a few and the political opportunists.

B Sant

Feb 13th 2009, 10:02

Quote shame for the country not to allow a planning process to continue". End Quote

coz all the men in the street that the planning process is flawed from beginning to end and the no one with an independent mind has a trust in the planning process

e.cortis

Feb 13th 2009, 09:55

It is strange , to say the least ,that these bigheads find it convenient to push the Archbishop to the frontline NOW !. Shouldn't the Prime Minister and these honourable people have contacted or talked and asked His Grace the Archbishop's opinion long ago ?. Why involve His Grace on the feast of Saint Paul, just a day before the opposition's motion was due to be discussed in Parliament ?.

mario mifsud

Feb 13th 2009, 09:50

pull the other one will you
in the past, decisions taken had not been altered when the circumstances were the same as here and no doubt certain decisions wont also be changed in the future
do you really think we are so stupid
RCC this is like saying zeppi l-hafi had some good qualities and some less good qualities !

john testa

Feb 13th 2009, 09:12

'Philip Farrugia Randon and Paul Attard, dismissed any notion of resigning,'. They would be fools if they do....and lose income just for being blue eyed.