The recent publication of the draft law that will bring about the Mepa demerger has prompted much discussion.
Debates and sharing of ideas are always healthy, especially when more than one side of the coin is presented. Following various articles covering the potential negative aspects of the proposed law regarding the protection of our nation’s heritage, it is opportune and indeed necessary to propound the side of the coin that has been somewhat neglected by some and, possibly, misinterpreted by others.
It is indeed true that the new planning law will dissolve the Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee (CHAC). There can be no doubting the sterling work carried out by this committee through the years.
However, what on paper should have been a seamless and foolproof situation turned out to be something completely different in practice.
No fewer than three opinions were given on heritage matters during the planning process – all by notable experts from within recognised and official bodies: 1) the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage (SCH); 2) the Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee and 3) Mepa’s own Heritage Protection Unit (HPU). Whereas opinions often converged there did exist instances when these did not. In the case of the latter, disagreements were used by those partaking in the application process to their advantage but not always to the advantage of Malta’s heritage. Rather than one counter-balancing the other, any slight disagreement between these three bodies was perceived as a sign of weakness to be exploited to push one’s agenda.
The handing over of planning responsibilities to one single authority, whose duty to protect Malta’s cultural heritage is enshrined in the Cultural Heritage Act (2003), is aimed at addressing this potential for misinterpretation.
Concerns expressed by NGOs and former CHAC members regarding the understaffed and under-resourced SCH are entirely justified. Since its inception in 2002, the SCH has been fighting a somewhat losing battle against a workload that consists of far more than dealing with Mepa permits.
A new era will see a more efficient, effective management and protection of our islands’ unique cultural heritage
For those who may not be aware, the Superintendent leads a small team covering aspects of heritage that include, but are not limited to: a) the monitoring of ongoing construction in archaeologically sensitive areas; b) the issuing of permits for archaeological surveys and excavations; c) the management of the national database of cultural heritage; d) international conventions; e) collaboration with the police, the armed forces and Interpol on the illicit trade and movement of artifacts; f) actively monitoring World Heritage sites and liaising with Unesco and g) managing numerous agreements that govern the management of cultural heritage sites by local NGOs.
As already stated, this is not an exhaustive list.
It is therefore understandable that additional workloads related to Mepa applications are perceived as potentially detrimental to Malta’s cultural heritage. This is where I believe that those responsible for this transition, myself included, are somewhat ‘guilty’. Guilty not of having any intent to weaken the structures that protect Malta’s heritage but of not communicating the information that may have allayed certain fears and led to a more informed debate.
Over the past months, there has been a concerted effort by those involved in the transition to ensure that the proposed demerger does not have the negative effects that have been expressed. To do this, the SCH will be strengthened by a team of no fewer than five extra persons, one of whom will be a qualified architect. The external calls are in the process of being finalised and will be issued shortly.
Malta’s supreme entity for the management and protection of our cultural heritage will, for the first time, have a specialised team dedicated to the processing (of the heritage segments) of Mepa applications. Furthermore, this unit will be able to draw upon internal expertise and experience already extant within the SCH.
Finally, SCH personnel who are today dedicating their entire time to process Mepa applications will now be in a position to take up tasks and issues that have long been overdue and are no less important to protecting our heritage.
Another current and extremely important action being undertaken is that by a working group specifically set up to oversee the new Planning Act and the Cultural Heritage Act (currently being revised). This group is exploring where and how these laws dovetail as well as which infelicities needed to be discussed and ironed out. Meetings are ongoing but rest assured members of this committee have no intention whatsoever of putting Malta’s heritage at peril.
These actions were discussed during various meetings of the Committee of Guarantee (which consists not just of government appointees but also of representatives of NGOs, the Church as well as of the Superintendent of Cultural Heritage and the chairman of Heritage Malta).
In the main, the proposed actions for the strengthening of the SCH and the latter’s processing of the heritage segments of Mepa applications were well received.
After well over a decade of an under-resourced all-important national entity that is the SCH we can now look forward to the beginning of what is potentially a new era that will see a more efficient, effective management and protection of our islands’ unique cultural heritage.
Timmy Gambin is chairman of the Committee of Guarantee at the Office of the Superintendence of Cultural Heritage.