Trees, rubble walls and BSS
Afew weeks ago, workmen were laying out a pavement on either side of the Rabat road near the Ta’ Qali intersection. A layby for the new buses, I thought! And so it was.
Little thought, if any, was given either to the Aleppo pine trees and the rubble walls along the stretches of the new pavement. The Aleppo pines, which characterise this stretch of road leading to Rabat, show a number of scars, now including fresh ones, resulting from mismanagement. Some of the trees are completely engulfed in concrete, some with nails hammered in them, further sealing their miserable fate at the hands of unsustainable mismanagement of the living natural heritage.
In the same stretch, part of the rubble walls were also heavily damaged! In an ingeneous, indigenous way, a brick wall was built on the rubble wall. As I slowed in the traffic to clear the roundabout intersecting the Żebbuġ, Mtarfa and Rabat roads – the one where sprinklers usually water much of the road as much as they water the turf – I could not help think and ask myself how the lack of coordination between ministries reigns supreme in this land.
A couple of weeks ago, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority declared new tree protection areas. In the same legal notice (200 of 2011), signed by the Prime Minister himself, there are two schedules of protected trees. The Aleppo pine trees along Rabat road are listed in schedule II. They are more than 50 years old and are growing in an outside development zone area.
Schedule II trees are protected to the extent that no person shall bury in the ground, dump, or deposit, any soil, manure, waste, rubbish, stones, rubble, scrap metal or any refuse near them; not even attempt to. Mepa is responsible for the administration, implementation and enforcement of these regulations.
Legal Notice 160 of 1997 protects rubble walls and non-habitable rural structures in view of their historical and architectural importance, their exceptional beauty, their affording a habitat for flora and fauna and their vital importance in the conservation of the soil and of water. It is unlawful to demolish them or to prevent free percolation of rainwater through rubble walls or to undermine the foundations of a rural construction.
The regulations add that no permit is required for sensitively executed repairs, provided that repairs are carried out using exclusively the same type of drystone rubble walling that composed the existing wall and that they do not significantly modify the overall profile or character of the wall. Again, Mepa is responsible for the administration, implementation and enforcement of these regulations.
Now, somebody in the corridors of power in this EU member state must be responsible for such works, unless, of course, someone convinces me that there is only a virtual government. The minister responsible for the environment cannot be held directly responsible for the works done but is directly responsible to ensure that environmental policies, laws and regulations are adhered to. He has a very expensive watchdog to see to this but it seems this watchdog is all bark and no bite.
The minister has the authority to direct in no uncertain way that the duty to protect the environment is not just his but is a collective political responsibility. As chairman of the National Sustainable Development Commission he has all the tools to do so. Unfortunately, as I finalised this article, I read in The Times that “Just before Parliament rose for the summer recess, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, who is responsible for environment matters, confirmed that the National Sustainable Development Commission was disbanded in 2008 after the government approved the sustainable development strategy. And this despite national and EU obligations! Yet, we are also told that “the government puts responsibility for sustainable development at the ‘highest level’”.
What is the use of drafting regulations and national environment policies when some Cabinet colleagues and their staff are immune to the laws of the land? In the meantime, the watchdog, Mepa, like pale melancholy, sits retired, staring and ruminating its impotency to control the mauling of environmental and public assets.
I would not be surpirsed if I am taken to task by some colour-blinkered pen pusher on grounds that this is a trivial matter. Admittedly, I am not writing on the building of a new power station but the same concept, the same perception and the same vision (or lack of it) apply to both examples. First, go ahead with the development and, then, consider the regulations and see if there are any necessary permits to acquire. In the meantime, tell the gullible this is highest level of sustainable development at its best.
The Bisazza Street Syndrome (BSS) is rearing its ugly head – one legislates, another ignores. If BSS is not taken by the horns and immediately put in check, it will soon become the national environmental policy without any need for public consultations and without any need for backup legislation. I can image that the picture of sustainable development to be submitted at the next UN Rio +20 conference in 2012 to mark the 20th anniversary of the Rio earth summit will be all nice and rosy: Malta puts responsibilty for sustianable development at the highest level while disbanding the commission to ensure that sustainable development is achieved.
7 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Vera Hussey
Aug 26th 2011, 15:55
certainly this is not a trivial matter. if only more people were as concerned as you are Mr Baldacchino. as happens all around the world unfortunately it is often too late when most people wake up to what has happened to their countryside and heritage. don't let it happen here!
dolores james
Aug 26th 2011, 14:45
MEPA’s shortcomings are forever being commented upon by various authors and yet no improvements are ever seen by Citizen Joe.
Whilst writing this comment I am accompanied by the noise emitting from a crane (which seems to have an engine that runs on unlubricated marble ball bearings and without an exhaust silencer-as it can be heard from half a kilometre away), which has been here (a tourist area) on and off for most of the summer months assisting in the construction of a rather “higher than normal top floor penthouse” which will surely add to the suffocation of the area and the environment in general.
A yet all watchdogs remain asleep.
Godfrey Camilleri
Aug 26th 2011, 13:58
I like the BSS part; one Ministry tries to promote and protect trees and another Ministry, notwithstanding that it has the tools, just doesn't care a hoot. Probably one of the problems is enforcement officers. I filed a minor complaint five weeks ago and despite repeated reminders, the omnipotent enforcement officer did not manage to find 30 minutes to check out my complaint. If it is true that they are overburdened, there is no other way but to increase staff; on the other hand, Mepa business has drastically declined so income is short; a vicious circle. Yet as Alfred says, there is no point in legislating if one does not have the means to enforce that legislation.
Mr Edward Mallia
Aug 26th 2011, 15:12
If 'there is no point in legislating if one does not have the means to enforce that legislation', there is even less point in a 'reform' which is left with a load of hostages to (past) fortunes, not to mention a 'reform' which leaves the 'reformed' agency still liable to provide spurious nonsense in defence of past and present actions. The Mepa PR on the eNGO Mgarr Petrol Station statement is a case in point. An outline permit -- irrespective of the doubts about its continued validity -- which compels (Mepa's word) the Mepa board to issue a full development permit: 1. Covering twice the outline permit (ODZ) area; 2. Not providing a new EIA for the larger area; 3. Asking for sanctioning of activities not mentioned in the outline; is a total travesty. Yet it was voted in 6 to 4 by the Mepa Board, over the inert body of the Environment Director and subsequently defended by a trenchant PR from the reformed Mepa. Perhaps all that the Reform has done is to change Esmeralda into the Hunchback of Notre Dame.
J. Fiorentino
Aug 26th 2011, 13:12
I agree with most of what has been written above at the risk of being considered a tree hugger! And if you really want to suffer....go to Chadwick Lakes. Been there this week.
Charlie Borg
Aug 27th 2011, 09:17
And what's wrong with being called 'a tree hugger'? This is like saying that someone is a 'do-gooder'. The silly people - article penners as well, mind you - who use these descriptions have no idea that in trying to denigrate people involved, they are only proving how poor they themselves are and what a compliment they are actually, inadvertently, lavishing onto others.
Bernard Storace
Aug 26th 2011, 11:24
Indeed sir, this is not a trivial matter. Our trees are an endangered species and rubble walls are crumbling at a greater speed than one would like to see. Of course the powers that be, whether it is MEPA, the Transport Authority, Cikku the contractor etc. have no regard for our countryside, heritage, flora and fauna. Theirs is a selfish interest and as long as there are no (visible) enforcement officers with prosecuting powers our land will carry on being spoiled by financial greed, self acclaim and above all this apathy and lack of education.