Authority’s indefensible attack on the NGOs

I refer to the letter entitled Mepa’s Meetings With Green NGOs (November 19) by Peter Gingell, communications officer of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority.

Considering the low esteem in which the public holds this authority, few people would envy Mr Gingell’s PR role. Having failed to impress the public, Mepa’s PRO seems to be making recourse to two old tactics: Attack the NGOs rather than defend an indefensible Mepa; and attempt to divide and rule by attacking the NGOs one at a time, setting one against the other. He can gauge his success or otherwise by going through the large number of press releases that the NGOs have collectively issued in a spirit of solidarity and shared values.

As for his allegations, representatives from other green NGOs present at that particular meeting can vouch, as some have already done, that I did not “misquote” what Austin Walker said. Let me remind Mr Gingell that my intervention concerned the five applications to sanction illegalities committed at Ta’ Baldu, of which the DCC boards had already approved three! I asked how Mepa could repeatedly approve applications to sanction illegalities on the same protected Natura 2000 site, rather than inflict penalties? Such behaviour encouraged developers to first do what they like and then apply to sanction, knowing full well that the illegalities would readily be approved.

Mr Gingell must have been inattentive at the time because “residential applications that seek permission for an increase in footprint in outside development zones” were not mentioned. (Illegal works carried out at Ta’ Baldu concerned listed buildings that were irreversibly altered, landscaping works that involved spoilage of native natural habitat, introduction of invasive plants, the erection of gate and construction of swimming pool, among others.)

Lest Mr Gingell believe he intimidates me with his letter, let me reiterate: “Mr Walker answered spontaneously that he preferred sanctioning by the Mepa boards rather than letting cases go before the Appeals Board, because anyway, this board always decides in favour of the appellants.” When Mr Walker denies that himself then I will begin to take the matter seriously. Mr Gingell’s statement is of no consequence.

Following Mr Gingell’s allegation, I understand why Mepa refused my suggestion that records be kept of what is said during these monthly meetings.

What I do not understand is his reference to the “mileage” that he fancies I gain by “misquoting” what gets discussed! What mileage?

Together with many other members of the green NGOs we give our time to the monthly meetings voluntarily out of concern for our country’s environment, without profit or gain.

Has the irony ever hit Mr Gingell’s mind that we fork out time and money with the sole purpose of ensuring that the highly paid public officers perform their duty and uphold the rules they are bound to apply? Mr Gingell’s elaboration on this point is solicited, otherwise an apology is due.

As for his statement about the satisfaction NGOs derive in these monthly meetings with Mepa officials, I advise Mr Gingell to read Edward Mallia’s (honorary president, Friends of the Earth) online comments to his letter (November 19) and the statement by the Gaia Foundation regarding its “rosy” relations with Mepa (November 19).

What really matter are not the placating statements and lofty presentations made by Mepa officials during these meetings but the decisions which irreparably destroy our natural and cultural heritage that continue to pour out of Mepa despite being in full-reform mode.

This is the truth, the rest is just hot air.