Juan Ameen
Plans to sanction illegal boathouses
Concrete platforms removed from bay
Hundreds of illegally built “boathouses” at St Thomas Bay in Marsascala may be sanctioned under an action plan being developed by the planning authority.
A spokesman for the authority told The Times that the action plan would provide guidelines and “holistic direction” similar to the Qawra/Dwejra Action Plan. This takes into consideration the boathouses built illegally over the decades in the protected and scenic bay of Dwejra in Gozo.
The spokesman said that once the action plan is approved, the boathouse owners would be “in a position to regularise the land and can put in an application to sanction”.
However, this will take time and, so far, there is no deadline in sight. “It is still in very early stages – we are working on the terms of reference and, eventually, a draft copy will have to be issued for public consultation,” the spokesman said.
It is estimated there are around 370 boathouses at St Thomas Bay, which are populated by families every year to enjoy a summer by the sea. The area is also very popular with caravan owners who in summer park their vehicles on concrete platforms built illegally on the beach.
Over the years, several environmental organisations have urged the government to crack down on the boathouses, which were becoming more numerous as time went by.
The Mepa spokesman maintained that some enforcement was taking place irrespective of the upcoming plan, pointing out that enforcement officers in recent weeks had removed concrete platforms as well as material dumped on the roadside.
The news of the action plan comes on the back of a recent decision by the planning authority to reject five requests to sanction extensions to boathouses in Dwejra.
Last year it had turned down another 13 requests.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
168 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
David Scicluna
Jul 12th 2011, 23:50
Let us make one thing very clear. The land in question at St.Thomas Bay is PRIVATE and NOT PUBLIC. This makes a lot of comments below at best empty. Also, it could be that some of them are old enough to make them legal.
Raymond Sammut
Jul 13th 2011, 13:19
@ David Scicluna
You need to substantiate your claim that "The land in question at St.Thomas Bay is PRIVATE and NOT PUBLIC."
Who bought and sold the land? For how much, and when did this transaction occur?
If the land is private, then the Maltese government has the obligation to explain to the general public how come that a large stretch of land, only a few meters away from the shoreline, comes to be in private hands.
If the land is private, copies of the deeds must be produced and made readily available for public inspection; given that there is nationwide concern in regard to this issue that continues to plague Maltese society and makes Malta look like a country of backward anarchists.
Ms D Galea
Jul 12th 2011, 15:04
By what stretch of the imagination can one sanction a building that has been built on illegally seized PUBLIC land? Is the yet another example of the much vaunted Riforma tal MEPA under Drs Gonzi and Demarco?
Brandon Caruana
Jul 12th 2011, 19:30
The land is private as has been said a thousand times. It was bought from the monks in the 1950s/1960s. Building on the land could be illegal and with no permit
Raymond Sammut
Jul 13th 2011, 02:46
@ Brandon Caruana
"It was bought from the monks..." Can you please explain, Mr Caruana? Who exactly were the "sellers" and the "buyers" in this business transaction which you allege to have occurred back in the 50s/60s?
The responsibility of land use rests entirely with the Maltese government, even if it happens that the land is not publicly owned. Governments of sovereign nations are empowered to repossess land wherever it is deemed that benefits of the nation's economy far outweigh the benefits of the few.
It is absurd that illegal structures --erected only meters away from the waterline-- continue to mushroom without the Maltese government fulfilling its obligations to the general public. It is even more absurd that someone comes along and claims that the land is "private" because someone bought it from monks some half-a-century ago.
Ultimately, responsibility falls squarely on the government of the day. St Thomas Bay and Dwejra are the classical examples, and an independent inquiry across Malta and Gozo needs to be set up and authorized by Malta's parliament under the auspices of the President.
It is about time that men and women charged with governing Malta get off their bottoms, and take action in order to clean up all the stink that has accumulated over so many decades.
For example, why in a MEPA document, published online, just a few names appear some 30 to 40 times --each time requesting some form of land use? What is really going on with these MEPA requests and permits, while the general public has no time to look at the details and find out the meaning of all this?
In the end, what the public discovers is that come the week-end, there is hardly anywhere left on Malta where people can go for recreation and to enjoy their own birth place. As a first step, the President of Malta should order the PM to place a moratorium on MEPA activities so that no further permits can be issued. MEPA has clearly degenerated into a dangerous piece of bureaucracy --scarring and mutilating Malta and Gozo beyond recognition.
Ms pamela hansen
Jul 12th 2011, 11:52
As I said in my column on June 26, "Mepa needs to reconsider its use of the word 'sanction' and start using it as a punishment imposed as a result of breaking the law and not giving official approval for an illegaility."
Raymond Sammut
Jul 12th 2011, 03:39
The ambiguity here is reflected by the way the word "sanction" continues to be used by MEPA. The word is tricky because it can have exactly opposite meanings. When communicating with the general public, the MEPA spokesperson should use language which is clear.
The question is: Is the Maltese government planning to legalize (rather than sanction) illegally built structures on public land?
If the answer is yes, then obviously this planning should be opposed in all possible ways, and anyone suggesting such planning should explain themselves. For example, supposing one of these illegal structures was built in the backyard of the home where the MEPA employee lives, would the spokesperson want to legalize it?
It's always easy to legalize an illegal structure built on public land where the average Maltese citizen is the usual loser.
Dr Gonzi is directly responsible for the planning authority, so one would expect --as a start-- that someone in parliament will put some serious questions to the PM in the House. If Gonzi does not have decent answers to give in parliament, then he should at least have the decency to disband the planning authority; or people --especially those in the PN party-- should vote him out.
I cannot see what else the general Maltese public can do. I consider this behavior from the Maltese government to be nothing less than criminal, for it gets to a point where healthy living on Malta becomes impossible.
When families every year go to "enjoy a summer by the sea", it has to be "all" families and not just some of them. And "by the sea" means "everywhere" by the sea for all, and not "somewhere" by the sea only for some.
Governments are morally obliged to serve all society with fairness. The Maltese government here is proposing to give privilege to the few at the expense of everyone else. It should not be able to do it with impunity.
c.t. busuttil
Jul 11th 2011, 21:34
How can I book my own spot on this idyllic beach?
Robert Micallef
Jul 13th 2011, 11:23
Buy a plot, there are still some for sale. Of course I you build now MEPA will have it removed but if you could buy one which was built prior 1969 but the price would be a bit hefty!!!
Mr Francis Isherwood
Jul 11th 2011, 18:07
MEPA removed some concrete caravan stands ( a whole 2 of them - left eight about 100 metres away, and the 2 caravans removed were old abandoned ones that no one used) and material dumped on the road side?? which road side, there is no road there, just a wide dirt track this was material left over from the last time repairs to the boundary wall had been repaired, many moons ago!!
Loreta Lija
Jul 11th 2011, 17:49
We should vote to anybody who will promise to clean Malta of these shanty towns,plus they look like some remote place in India.My God some people I cant understand how they live,next thing they will start to interbreed between themselves.
Mr Joseph Calleja
Jul 11th 2011, 19:30
What a great idea. Politicians are afraid of rocking the boat because either them or somebody from their family or friends own some of these boathouses all over the island. Your idea would work perfect because there are a heck of a lot more people(voters) that don't have a boathouse by the seaside than those that do. Politicians know where the votes come from and maybe the non houseboat owners can persuade them or at least one of them to speak out openly on these shanty towns along the coastline.
Elaine Debono
Jul 11th 2011, 17:07
the usual sickening story in this country ... break the rules, build illegal slummy shacks and you get a pat on the back .... on the other hand, if you are a law abiding citizen and try to go through the right channels to have everything regularised and in order you are slapped in the face with lots of redtape, bureaucracy, and massive bills only to be turned down ... instead of doing our best to make this island look better we encourage run-down slum areas .... mepa's vision for the future - slum areas and concrete matchboxes
Mr martin chetcuti
Jul 11th 2011, 19:08
Agree 100%. Recently I was refused a compliance certificate from Mepa only because a backyard was ONLY 3 cm short than what is legal !!!!!!!!!!! As an abiding citizen I remedied what was wrong. Now this Eyesore Shanty Slum area seem to stay forever and to insult to injury they pretend to sanction this Favelas
Dennis Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 16:07
Oh good news!!!
I can now go and build a multi room seafront house in St. Thomas Bay, call it a BOATHOUSE and then legalize it through MEPA.
Thanks. TH e land would be then mine and anyone coming around would be sent off. THIS IS PRIVATE PROPERTY so GO AWAY!!
Here I come with the truck load of stones, concrete mixer and bulldozer to OCCUPY PUBLIC LAND and then MEPA sanctions it.
NICE ONE . . .
Mr David Calleja
Jul 12th 2011, 00:02
Can someone from MEPA and the government tell me what I have to do to qualify for one of these boathouses on prime public land....?? what a sorry excuse for a nation - AirMalta is sinking .... Arriva is non-arriva mostly .... 70,000 apartments are empty... and I never knew we had so many MPs with such heavy consciences .... and what do we do?... why we discuss giving stolen land to the people who stole it... oh yes what's the word??. get it sanctioned !!!
Robert Micallef
Jul 13th 2011, 11:27
STOP calling the area as PUBLIC LAND-IT IS NOT. IT IS ALL PRIVATE PROPERTY.
Steve Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 16:06
MEPA please take of fthe 'E' that stands for Environment from your name...it makes no sense
Then what remains is MPA - Malta Planning Authority
Yet again, you can change the 'P' with a 'B' instead, which comes:
Malta Building Authority
How sad
Mr Joseph Calleja
Jul 11th 2011, 16:03
Here we go again; it must be getting close to election time. If MEPA (the government) justifies this action, then every citizen in Malta has the right to purchase a piece of land (public land) by the sea and build him a boathouse? Anybody can buy him a caravan and park it anywhere he chooses and call this a boathouse? Give us all a break Mepa. Most of these houses and or caravans are occupying most of the better spots on the coastline to where an ordinary citizen cannot enjoy the pleasure of spending a day at the beach with his family. Please don't even mention the Dwejra Bowl in Gozo, those " boathouses" as we call them, make the Dwejra Bowl look like a shanty town, a ghetto. The very few have managed to ruin one of the most beautiful places on the islands, thank you Gozo Mepa. And how does one explain the fact that the sewage lines in this beautiful Bowl are not connected to the main sewer line? If not, where does the sewage from these boat houses end up? And the same question goes for any of the other boathouses all over the islands. I apologize if I am wrong, but I would appreciate a straight answer from Mepa. We are willing to accommodate the few in the name of politics? Votes mean that much that we are willing to sacrifice our beautiful beaches. Any decent beach has either been taken over by boathouses or else by umbrellas and caravans. What are the rest of the unlucky citizens and tourists supposed to do to find a decent place when they take their families to the beach? Citizens are entitled to enjoy the beaches without being harassed by the boat house people or umbrella people etc..
Mr Emmanuel Ebejer
Jul 11th 2011, 15:49
Instead of sanctioning illegal boathouses at St Tomas Bay, Mepa should investigate how a small wooden shack at the same bay has been turned into a restaurant/small complex by occupying land which for sure is public. But Mepa is not known for flexing its muscles with the big fish.
Harold Felice
Jul 11th 2011, 15:23
That's excellent. So, does this actually mean that as of now all can occupy government land, bulid illegal dwellings and have them sanctioned by MEPA /government?
Also, will government be paying up any loans for those of us who have a loan to pay back? And, if they don't, wouldn't it be a case of two weights and two measures?
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 15:57
Seriously if this goes through, many of us should consider suing the government for discrimination!!
Dennis Mark Gauci
Jul 11th 2011, 15:14
Iz zmien tal buzulotti spicca. Ma nistawx nibqaw ghaddejin qisu xejn mhu xejn. Xjigiferi tilegallizza xi haga illegali. Min irrid dar fejn il bahar jixtri flat jew dar legali mibnija min persuni onesti bil permessi ukoll li jhallsu it taxxa u il bollol bhal kullhadd iehor. Dawn il kmamar kollha jridu jigu mkissra minghajr ebda riflessjonijiet ohra. Inkella ha nibqaw sejrin lura bhal granc !!
David Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 15:07
nghid jiena MEPA x`ghandna bzonnha. Kulhadd jibni li jrid biex meta tasal xi elezjjoni, kollox jigi legali.
MEPA l-isbah cajta ta Malta. Some enforcement was taking place, LOL.
Dawn ghandhom guidelines biex ibiddluhom kif iridu.......
Mr Chris Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 14:57
Why do the vandals instead of vandalizing public parks and monuments instead go to these illegal boat house slums in winter and destroy their windows, doors, fences, television arials, satellite dishes, electricity cables etc.. etc..
They would be doing the majority of the public a favor.
Mr Ivan Calleja
Jul 11th 2011, 14:52
These are not boathouses...this is ONE BIG SLUM AREA!! The authorities, especially MEPA, have ZERO environmental credibility so i'm not surprised by this decision at all!! This is a SHAMEFUL decision but this government has been taking the environment for a ride for the last 20 years or so!! If they are illegal bulldoze them if not give an adequate compensation and bulldoze them! When are we going to start to clean this island which we have turned in one huge eyesore!!! With these news in the air NEVER!!!
N. Bonello
Jul 11th 2011, 14:45
ANOTHER SAD DAY FOR MALTA.
Mr norbert schembri
Jul 11th 2011, 14:08
Jien ukoll ghandi ghalqa hdejn il- bahar, mela issa naqbad u nibni residenza ghas sajf, mhux hekk? La dawn ghandhom id-dritt, jien ghalfejn le? U bilhaqq, boat house, jekk taqlibha bil malti tigi post fejn izzomm id-dghajsa u mhux residenza tas sajf, bil kamra tal banju, kcina u it-toilet!! Bdiet riesqa l- elezzjoni u beda il- massakru fuq l- ambjent biex forsi nigbru erbgha voti.
Mr Chris Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 14:02
Public Land or Private Land, these "boat houses" (Summer Houses) were built illegally. It does NOT matter if it was private land. I cannot go and buy a field in a green area which go really cheap and build a house on it, so neither should these bums who have the ILLEGAL boat houses. Nobody cares if they were built 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40 years ago or 100 years ago.
MEPA, DO NOT sanction them. Instead do the right thing and send the bulldozers to knock down those horrible slums and clear the area.
Those ILLEGAL "boat houses" are not a necessity, they are a luxury. They are a luxury for those bums to enjoy a seaside summer house for free (or next to nothing). They were built illegally.
Any government that lets the sanctioning of these illegalities will LOSE mine and many others votes in the next election and i will make sure of that.
While they are at it they should waste no time demolishing the "boat houses" in armier, dwejra and others. Also the Boathouses in Buggiba are almost all being used as summer residences. Send a team over to empty them and have them policed and anybody caught using them as residences shall have them taken away from them. A boathouse is to keep a boat in, NOT a family.
Edmund Gerada
Jul 11th 2011, 13:55
Jekk ma tafux sinjuri l-art li mibnijien dawn il-boathouses hija kollha art privata u mhallsa. Jien nixtieq nisma kummenti rigward kif ix xena giet meqruda bil power station li saret u ha tkompli tinqered bit tniggis u mux fuq il-boathouses. Ahjar il-MEPA tara il-hsara li ghamlet hi stess u qadt ma hadet hsieb l-ambjent tal-madwar. Dan il-boathouses ilhom hemm mis sitinijiet u sebajnijiet fejn il-MEPA qadt meziztit u mghanda l-ebda dritt li twaqa dawk il-kmamar imma tista biss tiregolarizza biss billi tohrog certu regolamenti.
Joseph Agius
Jul 11th 2011, 13:46
jahasra hafna nies jitkellmu u ma jafux ir-realta kif inhi. Nibda biex insemmi li grazzi ghal kumitat mghamul mil istess nies li ghandhom il-kmamar San Tumas saru hafna affarijiet ta gid ghal min imur f listess bajja, insemmu fost l ohrajt il facilitajiet ghal persuni li juzaw il-wheelchairs biex il bajja tkun aktar acessibli ghalihom kif ukoll il qudiessa fil berah li ssir kull gimgha u ghaliha jattendu mijiet ta nies, dejjem b fondi mil istess kumitat.
Izda ninsew dan kollu, tridu tiftakru li hafna u hafna kmamar f San Tumas huma diga bil permess igifieri l argumant ta hafna li ghandhom jaqaw dawk ta bla permess ma jghamilx sens ghax x jiswa li fi triq twaqqa hames kmamar bla permess u thalli hamsa li ghandhom il permess. Apparti min hekk u dan laktar punt importnanti ghal min qieghed jghid li dik art misruqa mil poplu tajjeb wiehed ikun jaf li dik mhix art tal gvern izda art privata, igifieri l argumenti li flok dik lart ghanda tikber il bajja jew jisri haga jew ohra ma jghamilx sens ghax l art hija privata. L uniku say li l gvern jista jkollu jekk jghatix permess ta bini jew le.
carmen mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 13:43
I would like to answer all those persons who spoke and accused other people without knowing the facts. I wish to inform you that the land was purchased legally with contract and contributions paid by the boat houses owners back in 1980! At that time MEPA still didn’t exist. The buyers, were assured that the permits for the boat houses were to be issued in due course and had the go ahead to build the houses which was unfortunately misleading. They were taken to court back in 1980‘s and they won the case. I would like to note as well that all boat houses have all the sanitary requirements. The whole problem is that St Thomas bay was for a long time abandoned and not taken care of, like other bays. What is needed there is that Mepa will take the necessary steps to ensure that the bay will become attractive to the eye!. I am sure that all the boat owners will co-operate with mepa and will do all the necessary work to arrange their boathouses. If all the boat houses look alike with tarmac given to the roads and arrange the sea side, St Thomas bay will be one of the best bays here in Malta!! Its useless that you say, that the boat houses needs to be taken down, because since the land remain its owner, the government has no rights on the said land.
On a last note i would like to remind everyone that not every person who has an illegal property is on the bad side.. and please before you accuse make sure that you know the facts.
Edmund Gerada
Jul 11th 2011, 14:03
prosit carmen.
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 14:21
Why are they called boat house? So before I to do an extension to my house I need a visit from tas-Sanita!! but someone living in a boat house - illegally - no that is not a problem!!
Mr Chris Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 14:46
"I am sure that all the boat owners will co-operate with mepa and will do all the necessary work to arrange their boathouses"
- I am sure they will. It will put up the value of their extra residence.
"Its useless that you say, that the boat houses needs to be taken down, because since the land remain its owner, the government has no rights on the said land. "
- So by your reasoning i have a right to buy a piece of land in a green area for way cheaper then it would cost me in a heavily built area and build a house and the government have no right to tell me what to do because i own the land.
Victoria Vella
Jul 11th 2011, 14:59
@ Ms Mifsud
'Illegal, or unlawful, is used to describe something that is prohibited or not authorized by law or, more generally, by rules specific to a particular situation' Wikipedia.com.
You say that you own the land and that you have deeds to prove this.
You also say that permits to build boathouses were to be issued in due course. Who promised this? The persons who sold you the land?
You said permits were never issued so the structures on this land is illegal. You only own the land. You had no right to turn it into a shanty town even if St Thomas Bay was in an abandoned state.
Law abiding citizens apply for a building permit before they start developing a piece of land which they own.They follow regulations and established norms.I can't imagine how MEPA can sanction all the boathouses. The area in question can't accomodate so many structures and so many people. We normally associate these type of dwellings with third world countries
. Most probably the original allotements were bigger but along the years these were divided among siblings and some parts even sold to third parties. I wonder if there are deeds to show this. Structures were added according to need and the end result is what we see now.
As I stated in an earlier post you are not the only culprits. Everyone should be equal before the law. No illegal structure should be sanctioned. If you bought the land legally the land is yours and you can go and picnic on it. If you built the structures illegally they should be pulled down.
David Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 15:16
Was St Thomas abandoned and not taken care of ? or were authorities turning a blind eye, because thats the reason why you could build a small flat with no problems. And we are supposed to believe that everyone who built a flat (as opposed to a boat house) over there has legal ownership of that land, cause you informed us.
Mr Joseph Calleja
Jul 11th 2011, 16:54
"What is needed there is that Mepa will take the necessary steps to ensure that the bay will become attractive to the eye!" The only way to do that is to demolish all the houseboats and start from scratch? Are you willing to accept that? of course not.
Paul Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 17:10
Most probably these agreements were made during the government at that time when land speculation at the southern parts of Malta was rampant and sometimes illegal. This is the reason why no building permits were issued at the time.
Ms T Scicluna
Jul 11th 2011, 19:26
BOAT HOUSES - you can not even get a boat to these buildings ....call a spade a spade and stop showing ignorance!
Christian Abdilla
Jul 11th 2011, 13:40
Why persist in calling them 'boat' houses ? The only thing these 'summerhouses' don't have in them is space for a boat ! The rest, like fridges, cookers, you name it, they have it inside. One thing is certain..it doesn't pay to be a law-abiding citizen in Malta !
L Vella
Jul 11th 2011, 15:10
I presume they insist on calling them 'boat houses' because that is exactly what they are meant for? While these 'houses' contain all the necessities of a house, most probably don't contain one important and indispensable item required in a house inhabited by humans - a toilet with proper sanitation facilities. The reason I guess is that er... boats don't normally need toilets?
JJ Debono
Jul 11th 2011, 13:39
Try and go to Gozo, you'll find plenty
Mr Slim Bartolo
Jul 11th 2011, 19:53
Yeah i know there are plenty in a small place called dwejra i believe,what of a sight for sore eyes .
Vanessa Desira
Jul 11th 2011, 20:15
@ L Vella: I assume all of them have proper sanitation standards. Do you have a car garage? Does it include a toilet? Cars don't normally need toilets but most garages have toilets nowadays. So think well before you write!
Ms Margaret Williams
Jul 12th 2011, 15:01
Did i read correctly and did you say THINK? Come now my girl Vanessa Desira the mMalterse don;pt think they asume yes, but they don't think. By the way > you have a nice name Jonathan Englese.
Jj Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 13:31
mela il boat houses biss jigu taht il kategorija ILLEGALI...tafu kemm ghawn penthouses u flats u hotels mizjuda minghajr il permess tal mepa..intom dawn taraw..kemm ghawn bazuzli li ghandom ghar mil boathouses..u naf x´jien nghajd......
Mr Joe Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 13:20
On the other hand,
Could this be a suttle DIVERSION to the ARRIVA Comedy, I Wonder??
Mr Tony Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 15:16
Good point. Several diversions at the same time.
The NON-Arriva-L issue, the Air MAlta issue, the disastrous situation of the euro, the DIVORCE issue and how GONEZI is going to vote next Wednesday, etc etc.
Ms Eve Axiaq
Jul 11th 2011, 13:15
Kollox ghal VOTI biss. Ambjent? Paroli biss
j brincat
Jul 11th 2011, 13:13
What prompted MEPA to consider legalising this illegality?
The general election?. Is this part of the incumbency?
(jb)
J. Scicluna
Jul 11th 2011, 13:11
No sanctions should be given to anyone without title to the land.
Moreover, neither should these be given who built illegally (without the proper permits) albeit on private land.
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 14:37
Are they living there? First they should be fined for living in a property meant to store a boat and not to host people. Second, where they built illegally, if yes then they should be demolished!! I wonder if any of them really have a boat!!!
marcus bonello
Jul 11th 2011, 13:11
Is this a no confidence vote in the Maltese people in their absolute majority???
j camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 13:10
Sabih eh ! Proset lill mepa u n-nutara u l-periti jekk qatt kien hemm ... x'maqjel ta' veduta qiesu Beirut !
Mr John Portelli
Jul 11th 2011, 13:02
If these people have the right to do such a thing, then why do we need MEPA?
Was hoping that Common Sense was no longer a LUXUARY as was once stated by the then MEPA chairman!
maria saliba
Jul 11th 2011, 13:00
@MARTIN CHETCUTI
IVA kellna miktub li tista tinbena boathouse dak iz zmien fis 60s. u boathouses ghadhom.
Mario Pace
Jul 11th 2011, 13:42
You should look up the meaning of the word boathouse in a dictionary. People do not live in boathouses, only boats are stored there. What you have at St. Thomas Bay are ramshackle slums called summer residences inhabited by people.
Christian Abdilla
Jul 11th 2011, 13:45
Aqtali kurzita, x'tip ta dghajsa izommu gol-boathouse ? Xi inflatable dinghy ? Ma nahsibx li dghajsa normali tidhol minn gol-parapett bil-hasira u l-bbq hux ?
Mr martin chetcuti
Jul 11th 2011, 16:13
@Maria Saliba
Tista ma zzid xejn izjed sinjura Saliba. Boathouse ma jistax ikolla uzu rezidenzjali naf sew x'qieged nghid
Claire Apap
Jul 11th 2011, 12:58
For all those who said it is public land and should be given to the public.. wrong... it is owned by the boathouse owners. And for those who said x ghaxqa ta propjeta, ghall min ghandu hi ghax its not a place its a lifestyle and i dont expect those who dont have a boathouse there to understand but most of us exist in the winter to live in the summer and that little boathouse is our haven.
Ms Maria Vella
Jul 11th 2011, 13:37
even if it is illegal?
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 14:19
@Claire Apap
So if I am a farmer and own farming land then - according to your genius reasoning - I should be allowed to build a house on farming land ... while at it why not also allow me to build flats?
The law is the law and if you built a boat house illegally it remains that - an illegal boat house and therefore it should be demolished!!
Anything less then that is injustice towards the rest of the maltese!!
maria saliba
Jul 11th 2011, 12:58
@ KEVIN FORMOSA
Sewwa jghidu li jekk ma tilhaqx lgheneb jghidu li hu qares . jiena dik laghxqa tieghi aqwa milli mur quddiem il pool
Kevin Formosa
Jul 11th 2011, 13:09
Kulhadd xortih Mari....pero li tikkapparra post ghax "l-ghaxqa tieghek u aqwa minn pool" ehhh Mari!! Hekk LEEEE
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 14:23
Everyone would love a room in front the sea. But some "STUPIDLY" obey the law while others "ABUSE" it. And in Malta you get prized when you abuse the law!! Good to know ... keep it in mind for next time!!
maria saliba
Jul 11th 2011, 12:55
@CHRIS MIFSUD
mela inti mort xi darba taghmel kuntratt u ma hallastx ghand in nutar?
Mrs shar camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 16:32
maria mela jekk joghgbok sibli bicca art hdejk ha nibn boathouse ghax la stajt int nista jiena!!!!
E. Azzopardi
Jul 11th 2011, 12:54
There is only one word for all this: UNACCEPTABLE
Mr JOSEPH AGIUS
Jul 11th 2011, 12:48
Why would anyone want to destroy the beauty that is shown in this photograph? Given that some of these shanties are, as we are told, on private land we should perhaps also vote money to have some cosmetics applied to those which lack that little bit.
Mr Joseph N. Attard
Jul 11th 2011, 12:48
Before the last election, it is said that Dr. Gonzi reassured the land robbers at Armier. Now, it is the turn of those at St. Thomas Bay. The government should realize that decent, law abiding people far outnumber those who are not. It is committing a gross miscalculation about the electoral consequences of its actions.
Mr Joseph N. Attard
Jul 11th 2011, 12:43
Someone commented: "Waslet l-elezzjoni". (The elections are upon us). Yes, and every single voter who loves the envoirement, who is extremly angry at the way these land robbers usurped his land, will definitely act accordingly. And I think that these amount to tens of thousands, and not a few hundred. Shame on the Government if this sanctioning is ever carried out.
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 14:35
I agree, but unless PL talks against this sanctioning then I will hold them responsible as well!!
Mr Alfred Baldacchino
Jul 11th 2011, 12:40
Sakemm tkun boathouse, fiha u ma fihiex. Izda hemmhekk hemm min ghandu dar zghira mghammra b'kollox !!
U rigward sanita` ? Mur u ara.
Mr Chris Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 12:33
It really doesn't pay you to work and buy your own property in this 'country'. Just claim a site you like and put some rubbishy structure together...and of course the people who deserve it least and contribute nothing to the economy get to this.
maria saliba
Jul 11th 2011, 13:05
diga ghidlek qabel ma tikteb ara laffarijiet sewwa u by d way jien inhallas taxxa bhall kull cittadin iehor li jhallas .
Ms Maria Vella
Jul 11th 2011, 15:00
Maria Saliba
do you want a medal for paying taxes? everyone should give they dues and definitely not expect anything 'extra' in return.
if the buildings are illegal then they MUST be removed. Fullstop!
maria saliba
Jul 11th 2011, 12:29
GHAL DAWN IN NIES LI QED JAGHDDU L- KUMMENTI LI DIN HIJA PROPJETA TAL PUBBLIKU JEW PROPJETA TAL- GVERN JEW GHAL DAWK LI GHAJRUNA CHEEKY ROBBERS , L-EWWEL GHANDHOM IKUNU JAFU EZATT KIF INHUMA LAFFARIJET. DIK PROPJETA TAGHNA PRIVATA BIL KITBA U BIN NUTAR .
Mr Chris Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 12:37
Bil kitba u bin-nitar u bla hlas imma, jew hlass ji la jirriflettix il valur
Kevin Formosa
Jul 11th 2011, 12:37
X'ghaxqa ta propjeta :)
Mr martin chetcuti
Jul 11th 2011, 12:40
@maria saliba
It-titolu tal-Art jista jkun tieghek izda ma jfissirx li seta jsir bini minghajr permess.,Hemm differenza.
Victoria Vella
Jul 11th 2011, 12:53
@Ms Saliba you have a right to the land but do you have a permit to build on this land?
Another thing I know quite a few people who bought illegal Boathouses at Armier. Most probably they have some form of deed but they are still illegal. Most were ready to pay thousands for illegally built boathouses because as they told me no government would dare to pull them down. In the end they will be sanctioned.
You small boathouse owners are not the only culprits. A case in point is the sanctioning of part of the Riviera Hotel at Marfa. All illegal buildings should be pulled down. Until this happens it pays to break the law!
Mr Joe Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 13:03
Bla PERMESS, ma tistax tibni, Hux?
Kevin Formosa
Jul 11th 2011, 12:04
Waqqaw illum qabel ghada......Hekk iridu dawn li jahsbu li jistghu jaghmlu li jridu!!
Mr twany sciberras
Jul 11th 2011, 12:04
Next thing they will be sanctioning the kiosks at Blue Lagoon, Comino. Has anybody seen the mess lately?
R. Gauci
Jul 11th 2011, 12:04
Dawn mhux biss ghandhom jitnehhew talli min okkupa, biex ma nghidx SERAQ, art tal-poplu, ghandu jhallas lura kirja xierqa fuq kemm ilu hemmekk. Hemm ghandha ssir bajja spazjuza u sabiha kif sar San Giljan li titgawda mill-poplu kollu mhux huma komdi u paxxuti u ahna mrassin fuq l-istess 4 bajjiet.
F'dawn l-affarijiet ma hemmx politka, jien Laburist pero f'haga bhal din all out mall-Gvern inkun ghax Malta hi ta` kullhadd, bluni jew homor.
Mr Daniel Jones
Jul 11th 2011, 11:42
I think that those of us who don't currently illegally occupy a piece of land had better get together and decide on a bay we would like to take over. We could then tell the government that unless they sanction our land grab then we won't be voting for them in the upcoming election.
This is shameful electioneering on the part of the government. Instead of doing what is right for the country, and bull dozing every illegally built structure in every bay on the island, it sanctions these ugly illegal dwellings.
I would also like to know where the sewage from these structures goes? Surely not into any treatment plant, so the government's claims of clean seas is clearly false.
Mr Joe Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 13:13
`I think that those of us who don't currently illegally occupy a piece of land had better get together and decide on a bay we would like to take over. We could then tell the government that unless they sanction our land grab then we won't be voting for them in the upcoming election.`
Agree with you 100%, that is my opinion too.
I think a Commitee should be set up to this Aim,
I like to help myself to a piece of Prime Land too.
Whether it is Private or Public Land is irrelevant, let us gather Strenght in Numbers and let us not Break Traditions,
Let`s Build without Permit. Let SHANTY TOWNS Thrive and Prosper.
Dave Alan Caruana
Jul 11th 2011, 11:39
to apply for water & electricity you need the compliance certificate from MEPA, that is unless your structure is totally illegal in which case it's just a case of waiting till it becomes legal ... what a wonderful country!
Mario Pace
Jul 11th 2011, 11:38
Who was it that said on announcing the new MEPA reform stated that from now on ODZ means ODZ and no development or sanctioning of illegalities would be tolerated in such areas ? If my memory serves me right it was our PM Dr Gonzi who said so. Not only his "safe hands" can be trusted any more but also his word now.
Jeffrey Muscat
Jul 11th 2011, 11:22
yes i fully agree with Mr.Sciberras
what about armier and gnejna ---
and......... delimara,ghadira,white rocks
i think everyone would like to have a place near the seaside -- but not everyone is arrogant to occupy public land
hope one day all this illegally occupied land is given back to the public
anton cassar
Jul 11th 2011, 11:16
Mhux talli qed ikerhu l-ambjent (il-ftit li fadal ) imma ma nistax nifhem kif hargu permessi ghal-bars u restaurants qalb il-hmieg ul-grieden !!!!
Tony Caruana
Jul 11th 2011, 11:15
WASSLETT ELEZZJONI GUYS.
Mr Joe Cordina
Jul 11th 2011, 11:14
OK then we all can just build our own illegal boathouse and wait for it to be sanctioned. Illegality pays in this country what a shame
Alan Deidun
Jul 11th 2011, 11:10
Strength in numbers - since the community at San Tumas is relatively large, MEPA is afraid to take the bull by its horns - probably, it will state that these boathouses are not as bad as the Armier ones since they are on private land - removing the concrete platforms is a good move but it will pale when compared with such massive sanctioning - this goes against the spirit of the MEPA reform which staves off any ODZ sanctioning
Mr Patrick Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 10:57
And where is the conscience of our MPs when you need it the most?
Mr Henry Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 10:52
From the photo in caption, it is amply clear that each 'boat' house has water and electricity services provided. Probably most of these are also equipped with airconditioning! How on earth were these services provided on illegal structures? and if a 'mistake' was done in the past, how can one turn a blind eye today when we have such an acute problem in water and electricity shortage provision. Or is government looking at things from a different perspective i.e. more income for ARMS?
MEPA my foot! This should be the Authority safeguarding our environment!
Enough is truly enough! MEPA is being manipulated by government in a pre-election stunt, carefully choosing an area with clear political leanings knowing too well that in all probability the PL shall not object.
The more of such tactics, the more I personally am losing faith not only in government but more so in our Parliament.
Quo Vadis Malta indeed!
Paul Baldacchino
Jul 11th 2011, 10:42
who dares, wins.......................
John Doe
Jul 11th 2011, 10:42
Simply incredible! And this is supposed to be the authority that guards the environment: what a farce!
Mr twany sciberras
Jul 11th 2011, 10:39
thought I heard this about Armier and Gnejna years ago. The buildings still stand....... but........bla bla bla
Mr Carmel Portelli
Jul 11th 2011, 10:39
Shame on MEPA, shame on the Goverment for sanctioning illegal grabbing of public land, shame on all of you whose job it is to protect public land from cheeky robbers. Let us hope that the names of those who proposed this sanctioning are made public.
Mr Vincent Buttigieg
Jul 11th 2011, 10:37
So is this another case of ONLY IN GOZO?? In Dwejra sanctioning is refused while in St Thomas Bay we actually draw up a plan to help the offenders sanction their misdeeds!!!!!!!! In the meantime does anybody mention Armier shanty town any more??????
Mr Patrick Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 10:37
I think Malta being a Mickey Mouse country, deserves its own Mickey Mouse government.
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jul 11th 2011, 10:34
Why such structures are referred to as boathouses when we all know they are anything but that is beyond comprehension. They are nothing less than illegally built summer residences.
In order to "enjoy a summer by the sea" law abiding citizens spend their hard earned cash to purchase property.
If MEPA on its own steam or under pressure from Government consider sanctioning such illegalities they are only proving their hypocrisy when treating any other illegality differently.
Mr Daniel Jones
Jul 11th 2011, 11:43
Well said Mark.
Mr Peter Murray
Jul 11th 2011, 10:33
More clear examples of TWO-TIER dichotomy system operating as what is the difference between various "boathouses"-don't you just love that departure from appropriate or accurate terminology as it's way up there wilh "Garages" for a total absence from proper definitions or usage thereof -and where they are located?So Armier is fine is it?The election campaign appears to be starting early!
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 10:31
Will PL protest the injustice made to the rest of the Maltese? Or ... silent as always on issues of moral and justice!? How come the two biggest political parties in Malta stay silent on issues such as this one ... where those Maltese who broke the law are prized and those who obey it take nothing!! ... or worse ... pay more taxes!!
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 10:27
This is unfair!! If the mass breaks the law then the law no longer apply. So what if a mass of people decides to stop paying taxes? You abolish taxes for them as well!!!
I think we all know what the problem is; these people are votes and political parties exist for the their own good and not for the good of the country!! In fact the country can go bankrupt as long as they manage to keep power!
j brincat
Jul 11th 2011, 10:23
Stealing or encroaching on government property and then by divine right pretend that the government legalises your position.
In Malta cowboys reign supreme!
(jb)
Guy Mahoney
Jul 11th 2011, 10:21
This is ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS!!
If this is public land then I, as a Maltese Citizen, have part ownership of this land and I object most vigorously that such squatters are given government's approval and have their 'building' sanctioned. Apart from the injustice these boathouses/summer residence are one of the most hideous eyesores to grace our shorefront. Some weeks ago I happened to go to Little Armier and you have the same story there.
MEPA should be ashamed if this goes through. By the same token I could camp in a public garden (e.g. Ta' Xbiex or Gnien Indipendenza in Sliema) and after some years I expect that MEPA would sanction this as a summer residence. This would be hilarious if it were not so pathetic!!!!
I wonder what type of pressure is MEPA under to encourage it to even consider such action.
Helllllloooooooooo MPs!!! Anybody there please????????
Mr Tony Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 10:46
Hehehe. Don't you know that the general election is getting soooooooooooooo near every minute?
Mr J Busuttil
Jul 11th 2011, 14:51
Tony Camilleri should we or should we not sanction these so called boat houses. Awaiting your reply.
L Lija
Jul 11th 2011, 10:21
Next election all you people of goodwill ,don't vote,remember that by your vote some people out there are getting rich.DONT VOTE THAT WILL TEACH THEM SUCKERS.
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 10:38
Unfortunately what our political parties will do is change the electoral law (again) so that they can stay in power even if only 20% of the Maltese go to vote!!! This is what PL and Pn stand for ... power NOT justice!!!
Benjamin Sant
Jul 11th 2011, 10:17
is this setting the grounds to sacntion gharmier as well?..... its a shame that politicians are more able to legalise unlawful activity rahter than protect and promote law abiding citizens.
If some citizens are allocated a piece of land free of charge.... its a right for all those who paid their dues to be allocated a piece of land just like anyone else
shame on you and mepa
Mr D Muscat
Jul 11th 2011, 10:06
Shame.
Victoria Vella
Jul 11th 2011, 10:03
Years ago, my father had a permit to build a boathouse at Wied Musa Cirkewwa on public land. For one reason or other he did not build the boathouse. At one point he was told that the permit was revoked. No problem with that. Conditions change. What I could never understand was that someone else just built an illegal boathouse instead of us. This person even told us that , that was what my father should have done. Is it fair now that all these people who built boathouses /summer residences illegally should be rewarded by sanctioning their illegalities?
I'm starting to believe that in Malta it pays to break the law. In our case we followed the law and ended up without a boathouse( and I mean a boathouse not a summer residence) while somebody else built illegally and will have his illegally built boathouse sanctioned one of these days. ONLY IN MALTA.
Benjamin Sant
Jul 11th 2011, 10:22
definitley it pays and how!!!!! and if u want to make sure ur 100% protected -- get into politics
Mr Tony Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 10:34
I swim in St. Thomas ' Bay- these shacks look like something out of Africa- it's who you know in Malta. Law enforcement is a joke.
Mr Charles Caruana Carabez
Jul 11th 2011, 10:00
@Robert Micallef: If it is private land, why is the Government sanctioning the mess?
Robert Micallef
Jul 11th 2011, 10:20
Remember that most of the boat houses were built prior to MEPA and Awtorita tad-djar. When the authorities set guide lines for most types of builings they stopped short on the boathouses, so the owners could never sanction such development. Of course both parties used the boathouse question as a political toll.
Mr Henry Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 10:34
Maybe the Government is sanctioning the mess because monks have a divine right!
Irrespective if whether the land is public or private, those who built on it did so illegally.
Shame on those who tamper with our coast and change it into shanty towns but more so on those who dare to sanction such illegal practice.
Quo Vadis Malta?
Mr Paul Barrett
Jul 11th 2011, 09:59
Basically if the construction houses a boat, it is a boat house. If the construction does not house a boat but has running water, electricity, showers, kitchen set up with TV, chairs etc, etc and or is lived in then it is a summer house. Both may be illegal or illegal constructions but for goodness sack, call a spade a spade. The so called "boat houses" at Qawra, complete with sat dishes, TV aerials, windows with curtains, some of which are lived in not just in the summer but in the winter as well are really tearing the bottom out of the definition of a boat house.
Sarah Ciappara
Jul 11th 2011, 09:44
Legalising townships now are we??
On a different note - I will spend the next 40 years paying off a home loan whilst others have the luxury of enjoying a summer residence that cost them next to nothing! How unjust.
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 10:29
I think you others like you should consider taking the government to court for discrimination since the government would have allowed some people to build on public land while others had to buy their own!! What do these people have so special? Can I go and build an illegal house and have it sanctioned!! Is this the message that the Government wants to give to those who believe that there is nothing wrong in breaking the law!?
Mr Tony Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 10:36
What makes me laugh is that whilst they are illegal they still get supplied with water and electricity!
Mr A Spiteri
Jul 11th 2011, 09:36
Here goes another fiasco by another government entity!
After the farce of Transport Malta in designing those routes, which are causing total havoc, now we want to legalise, illegal hideous structure simply for political goals!
This is utterly unacceptable, and whoever says he’s got the environment at heart, should unite and protest against this move!
Mr Oswald Tanti
Jul 11th 2011, 09:32
How can MEPA dare to even consider sanctioning if it knows too well that these are illegal encroachments of protected areas. Is this another clear sign of vote catching and that the elections are shortly due?
For MEPA to be credible there is only one way forward which is the continued removal at the expense of those who arbitrarily abused these protected areas. On the other hand, if sanctioning has become so indispensable, provided the land is public property, rather than sanctioning, these illegaly owned plots, these should ONLY be put up for short term temporary leasing against a public call for offers, making them available to ALL Maltese and not just the handful of land abusers. One important condition should be that any temporary structure/caravan must be dismantled or removed by the end of the lease.
The opportunity for one to enjoy the beach in summer should be extended to anyone interested in so doing.
On the other hand, if the land is privately owned, and the owner does not have the covering authorization, a daily penalty should be imposed on the owner for abusing a protected site until the area is properly restored to its original state. Regrettably in Malta it is quite common and convenient to ignore the NGO's appeals rather than maintaining the proper enforcement of the law.
It is absurd how such inconsistencies are allowed - Dwejra NO St Thomas Bay YES. When will we ever have a proper AUTHORITY with clout that will stop abuse and truly protect our heritage.
Mr Joe Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 09:31
`It is estimated there are around 370 boathouses at St Thomas Bay, which are populated by families every year to enjoy a summer by the sea. The area is also very popular with caravan owners who in summer park their vehicles on concrete platforms built illegally on the beach.`
So why the fuss, and great fanfare were a couple of concrete platforms destroyed, They were temporary structures anyway, and it looks like even more will be set up, LEGALLY of course..
I suggest for the authorities to take over these structures, before eventually removing them permanently, and rent them out to individual families, say for a month, thus giving others the chance to relax by the shores in Summer, should one wish to.
Alternatively the ORDINARY citizen, to set up a Commitee as a pressure group, so that thru membership fees, donations ect, Prefabricated Shanty Towns can be set up overnight, at other localities, at the same time applying for permanent permits from MEPA.
This I think will work out, easier with many people joining, ie. including environmentalist.
After all more members equates to substantially.....
MORE VOTING POWER.
Mr Victor Laiviera
Jul 11th 2011, 09:21
Seems that the rumours about an imminent election may be true after all.
What will the environmental organisations do? Will they remain shamefully silent, as they did when 13 "boathouses" were sanctioned at Dwejra just two weeks before the last election?
Timothy Cachia
Jul 11th 2011, 09:21
Shameful to say the least. I agree that these should not be sanctioned... public land is public land... demolish these eye sores and return the land to it's rightful owner... the maltese populace. Like dwejra, armier and everywhere else where public land was 'stolen' for their own personal use... these should be demolished.
Mr J. Bonnici
Jul 11th 2011, 09:15
Vittorja ghall-min abbuza
Mr mark johnson
Jul 11th 2011, 09:12
Are they connected to the sewers or do they use a potty and dump in the sea?
Mr Tony Gatt
Jul 11th 2011, 10:40
Good question- I have had an ear infection several tims swimming in St. Thomas' Bay and the doctor said it is a quite common infection.
Mr mark johnson
Jul 11th 2011, 12:22
It seems to me the day the government gave them power and street lighting was the day they sanctioned them.
Water and sewerage would be icing on the cake.
Mr Peter Murray
Jul 11th 2011, 09:07
ARMIER next?Getting closer to election time is it ?
joe attard
Jul 11th 2011, 09:04
The opportunity to sanction or obtain land must be given to all , by tendering or whatever method not only to those who broke the law for so many years.
Mr Ivan M. Dingli
Jul 11th 2011, 09:03
Such a nice way to start off the week..... reading The Times and being informed that the Government is in favour of theft. What a country we live in!!
Mr W Cassar
Jul 11th 2011, 08:57
If its public land..then Im speechless ...How on earth can the Government sanction ? Yet another reason not to vote PN!
j brincat
Jul 11th 2011, 08:49
It is evident that the elections are near.
It is, therefore, time to bend backwards
Oh, what a country!
(jb)
Carmel Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 08:49
I think it is most unfair that government should sanction an illegality. So once again the law abiding citizen stands to lose!!
Victor Pulis
Jul 11th 2011, 08:46
Will this cause a precedent? can anyone build a 'boathouse' wherever one can? Can anyone take the government to court for discrimination if one is not given permission to build?
A Zammit
Jul 11th 2011, 08:45
Shame on you MEPA!
You should bulldoze them all instead of sanction illegality.
Where is the government? Where is the opposition? This has became a country driven by bullies.
Mr Joseph Aquilina
Jul 11th 2011, 10:35
No, driven by two political parties whose only interest is power and not justice!! Who only see people as votes and take decisions based on the number of votes effected rather then on whether something is good or bad!! and the pity is that we stupid Maltese continue to vote them!!
Victor Pulis
Jul 11th 2011, 08:43
So now all one has to do is build a boathouse (where one's family can spend the Summer) keep fingers crossed for some time and pray. In time illegality will become legal and you're home and dry.
Mr Nick Grech
Jul 11th 2011, 08:42
I would like to build one in Tigne possibly with a large porch and a two car garage.
Paul Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 08:40
If MEPA is to sanction these illegally built boathouses, Lands Department is to impose a 100Euros per metre minimum annual rental charge for illegally occupying government (and therefore publically) owned land. Failure to pay such rental fees, Land Department will demolish the illegally built property. Otherwise we will be having another slum area similar to the Ghadira shanty town.
Mr Alexander Azzopardi
Jul 11th 2011, 08:37
About time
Mr Tony Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 08:37
Is this private or public land?
If it is public then there should be no sanctioning because it would amount to legalized theft of public property.
Charles Micallef
Jul 11th 2011, 09:36
Agree in total, we cannot have one rule for one and another rule for somebody else,
as that is exactly what splits our socciety!
Robert Micallef
Jul 11th 2011, 09:48
One again, Boathouses In St Thomas Bay are built on private land. The area was divided and sold in the 1950s/1960s for the purpose of erecting boathouses by the owners (a congregation of monks).
Mr Emmanuel Ebejer
Jul 11th 2011, 10:25
Most is private land for which we pay yearly ground rent. Our boathouse at St.Thomas Bay has been standing since the 1960s.
Denise Ann Buhagiar
Jul 11th 2011, 14:31
Even if the land if privately owned, it is still illegal to build permanent structures without a permit . There is many privately owned land in ODZ, and nowadays you can't build anything. Because MEPA didn't exist back in the 1970s, structures built then count as legal. However, if you had to compare photos of St. Thomas in 2011 with those in 1990 you can still see a difference! A lot has been added.
S. Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 08:32
Riesqa l-elezzjoni!
Denise Ann Buhagiar
Jul 11th 2011, 08:54
Yes, you could ask for anything now! What a shame to legalise an illegal shanty town! They just need a new road now and street names.
PS Even the church provides service over there on saturday evenings in summer. Full service indeed.
Mr Joseph Sammut
Jul 11th 2011, 09:19
You hit the nail directly on the head!
D. Xerri
Jul 11th 2011, 08:30
So there will be an action plan so that illegal boat-houses that have been enjoyed for entire decades built illegally by persons who cared less about the environment ! In this plan those persons who built illegally and went against the law for decades will be awarded with a permit to stay there for more and more years - Oh how nice - How merciful - caressing those who broke the law repeatedly for ages at the expense of our environment and other maltese people who did not built a boathouse but were neglected the right to enjoy the area since those illegal boathouses took over everyone`s maltese land.
I guess everyone would love it to have a boathouse for the summer months but seems those that took the law in their hands and built illegally are the only ones to enjoy it ! Very fair indeed !
Why not move out those who dont have a permit to stay in those boathouses and an application is offered to the maltese public who never broke the law and built illegally once new structures are built so that everyone can have the chance to enjoy the summer months and NOT ONLY THOSE who built illegally NOW with the Blessing from our authorites ! At least everyone can apply and once youre chosen after that summer youve had the boathouse you need for example 5 years to apply again so that many maltese families can enjoy a boathouse by the sea at least for once in their lifetime summers - But NO were gonna put back those who were illegally and say - ThankYou for stealing away our maltese land for entire decades - Hope you enjoyed your summer months every year there by the sea - now you can continue to enjoy it again and again since we would love to reward you with a Legal Permit !
John Pace
Jul 11th 2011, 08:23
The message being conveyed here is once again very clear.....
GO AND ILLEGALLY OCCUPY A PIECE OF PUBLIC LAND TO WHICH YOU WILL EVENTUALLY BE GIVEN TITLE THUS NOT ALLOWING OTHER LAW ABIDING CITIZENS ACCESS TO THE LAND GIVEN FREELY UNTO YOU!!!
Mr Pawlu Agius
Jul 11th 2011, 09:35
If I am correct, there is some law which makes you the owner of a land after having occupied it for some 15 years and the rightful owner never showed up (in this case the Government). Some years ago there was a parlamentarian (M.Bonnici?) who benefitted from such law. In Mosta, in Triq Dawret il-Wied, there is also one who occupied a large piece of land by placing soil in it and making a sort of boundary wall (located at coordinates 48430, 75015 on Mepa mapserver).
Mr Tony Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 10:51
30 years if the property was private, 40 years if it is government or church property.
See, even in these things there is discrimination between property belonging to private citizens and property belonging to the government and the church.
Mr Charles Caruana Carabez
Jul 11th 2011, 08:19
32 or so years ago, I paid 10,000 Maltese lira to buy a plot on which to build a very modest terraced house. I never had the money after that to buy a summer 'cottage'. I never knew that if you were so bold as to stick your flag on a patch of coast, and then jerry-build under one excuse or another, you could actually have a sort of summer residence for just the cost of the building materials. Mind you, even if I knew, I wouldn't have done that, but some people did. Now I am surprised that theft of national property, as well as the scarring of the pristine environment, is going to be sanctioned (given official blessing, I suppose it means). Anyone who thinks I am writing this out of jealousy does not know me. What irks me is that people who are so sensitive to sinfulness seem to feel that theft is one of the beatitudes.
Robert Micallef
Jul 11th 2011, 09:19
The land in Saint Thomas Bay was bought from the monks who owned the land in the area to be developed as boat houses. The boathouses were built before 1970.
Mr Henry Mifsud
Jul 11th 2011, 09:27
I concur ....... and with a tongue in cheek others are asking "And the ones at ARMIER ?" as if by divine right!
But then aren't we accustomed to see stretches of public land given to developers first as concession for Tourism purposes and then such concession changed to make way for blocks of apartments instead of a hotel?
Yes the elections are looming over the horizon.
Mr Tony Camilleri
Jul 11th 2011, 10:54
Robert Micallef thanks for the info.
In that case it is private land and they were built a long time ago.
What must be done is to force them to build in an orderly and proper manner with all services and not leave it like a shanty town.
I wonder how the monks and the church became the owners of vast stretches of land in Malta and Għawdex?
Mr David Grima
Jul 11th 2011, 08:18
What a disgrace!! These boathouses and those in Armier are reminiscent of the African slums and an aboslute blemish on the Maltese landscape !! I suggest that most of us should find a parcel of land and decide to construct a house. The government should then sanction it to prevent any discrimination !!
Mr Emmanuel Muscat
Jul 11th 2011, 08:17
And the ones at ARMIER ?
Maria Vassallo
Jul 11th 2011, 08:09
No two weights, two measures, please!