Deputy Prime Minister Tonio Borg told Parliament yesterday that once expropriation problems were solved, the government could concentrate on solving problems where land and property taken without a President's order under Labour administrations could be tackled so that compensation could be paid.
Speaking during the debate in second reading of the Land Acquisitions (Public Purposes) Ordinance (Amendment) Bill, Dr Borg said that successive Labour governments had applied the "possession and use" clause to expropriate land and property. This had been the case of land in Birkirkara where a housing estate had been built without any compensation being paid. Similarly, land had been taken years ago to build the bridge between Fgura and Paola. This land now had a much higher value.
Pending compensation cases amounted to tens of millions of euros.
Dr Borg strongly criticised opposition spokesman on culture Owen Bonnici and said that a comparison of the record of Nationalist and Labour administrations in this sector showed how much the present government had the national heritage at heart. Cases in point were the extensive restoration works in St John's Co-Cathedral and other churches, and the seven restoration projects currently under way on historical buildings in Valletta. The government had received millions of euros in assistance from the EU for the restoration of bastions and other historical sites.
Dr Borg said the Bill formed part of a series of legislation enacted by PN governments on heritage. In 1993 the government had bound its departments to pay compensation to owners according to valuation by the Lands Department.
This had been further extended in 2002 with government depositing compensation with the banks. Owners could withdraw this compensation without prejudice to making further claims. This showed the government's commitment to give immediate compensation, with the government also gaining the right to register the property in its own name. As a result compensation cases where a promise of sale was made could be solved.
Dr Borg also dealt with the definition of building sites, adding that historical sites in Gozo had been taken illegally and developed.
The government would not pay the market value but would give fair and proportional compensation when expropriating historical sites. The Bill established the criteria to be used. An inventory list of important historical buildings was to be made, with the government divesting itself of the issue. He referred to a number of constitutional cases where buildings had been taken in the public interest but used privately, such as a political club in 1986 and a band club extension today.
Owners had the right to challenge the public interest in expropriating property. This did not exist before 1987, when the government had transposed the European Convention of Human Rights into Maltese law. The Constitution protected the expropriation laws existing in March 1962. Fifty years later, through the present Bill, this was being fine-tuned according to European law and decisions taken by Maltese courts.
Up to 2006, decisions taken by the Land Arbitration Board could not be contested because there was no right of appeal. This was given to appealing on points of law and was now being extended to general matters, including the amount to be paid as compensation.
Concluding, Dr Borg said the Bill was proof of the government's commitment to safeguarding the national heritage.
Rest of the debate will be reported tomorrow.