The president of St John's Co-Cathedral Foundation, Mgr Philip Calleja, has again defended plans for an underground extension of the cathedral museum, saying that not doing anything would put the co-cathedral at risk because the present situation is not sustainable and with time, damage will be caused to the co-cathedral.
Reacting to a front page story in The Times yesterday, Mgr Calleja also pointed out that substantial EU funds that could be allocated to other valid projects are still available for take-up.
He said the foundation was granted EU funding for the extension of St John’s Museum after it submitted a detailed and technical submission making its case to obtain the co-financing for its project.
The foundation had applied for EU funding following a public call for which all Maltese entities were encouraged to submit proposals. The foundation’s technical submission was in line with the published regulations under Priority Axis 2 of the Structural Funds Programme for Malta, Mgr Calleja said.
Out of the €900 million allocated to Malta by the European Union, there were €120 million allocated to Priority Axis 2 of Malta’s Structural Funds Programme. €13.798 million of these funds (to which the foundation will be adding €2.06 million from its own funds as its co-financing share) were allocated to St John’s following the extensive adjudication process carried out strictly in line with EU regulations. The total allocated to St John’s is 1.5% of the funds allocated to Malta and 11.5% of those allocated to Priority Axis 2.
The objectives of Priority Axis 2 are the promotion of a sustainable and competitive tourism industry, supporting the upgrading of the tourism product and improving the competitiveness of tourism and culture operators.
Mgr Calleja stressed that St John’s Co-Cathedral, besides being a very active church, had become the main cultural tourist venue for visitors on the island, attracting some 400,000 visitors each year. Therefore, the relevance of the proposed project was highly significant to sustainable tourism in Malta.
“The foundation cannot understand how the co-financing of a project that will serve to preserve and lessen the current stress on the Co-Cathedral and enhance the experience of the 400,000 visitors can be put to question, particularly when taking into consideration the objectives of this Priority Axis under which the foundation obtained the co-financing,” Mgr Calleja said.
Neither could the foundation understand why it should be penalised because it had vision and was planning ahead to avert visitors’ damage to the Co-Cathedral rather than react after the damage was caused.
He also pointed out that substantial EU funds that could be allocated to valid projects were still available for take-up.
Referring to fears that the project could harm the structure of the co-cathedral, Mgr Calleja insisted that the foundation was not prepared to take any risks and that if the Environmental Impact Assessment or other technical and scientific studies indicated any possible danger to the Co-Cathedral, the foundation would not proceed with the project.
“However, the Foundation is not relying on the sometimes very divergent opinions being aired – however well-meaning – but is asking and waiting for a professional Environmental Impact Assessment before taking a final decision. It is very hard to understand how anyone can conclude that the project can jeopardise the very structure of the Co-Cathedral when the studies have not yet even started.”
It was also important for all who had St John’s interests at heart to realise that not doing anything would put the Co-Cathedral at risk because the present situation was not sustainable and by time damage to the Co-Cathedral would be caused,” Mgr Calleha said.
Referring to claims that that the Project Description Statement published by MEPA made no reference to geological studies, Mgr Calleja geological studies were carried on pages 33 to 36. It also includes references to a study on alternative buildings on page 33 (article 5.3.3).
“Moreover, the current consultation process by MEPA on the Project Description Statement is being carried out so that all interested individuals or bodies can ensure that matters they consider important in an Environment Impact Assessment will actually be added if they are missing.”