A resident, wherever one lives, is expected to tolerate most noises, within reason, without complaint.
Noise becomes unreasonable when it invades your space to the exclusion of everything else. Here are some examples: excessive noise from leisure establishments, especially during rest periods; noise generated by the never-ending construction activity; excessive noise discharged by the souped-up car exhaust, underlined by the bass from the super wattage system; the neighbour's uncontrollable urge to share his phobic noise rage; and seasonal noise, especially in the summer months, like intense noise generated by petards (not fireworks). And any other unwanted noise that intrudes into our private life.
I am sure that most of us at one time or another found that noise was unbearable but had to be tolerated due to lack of unified redress!
Those who think that I and others, who perceive noise as unwanted sound, should book a one-way ticket to the other side of the moon are blissfully unaware that the nuisance mentioned above or any unwanted sound are in breach of our laws or regulations. And yet!
Tolerance to noise might be a trait of our culture. As if noise constitutes part of our psyche, often released as an unwanted sound during social or other functions as an integral mode of communication. Therefore, self-indulgence calls for a lenient disposition towards our neighbour's vocal amplification!
A drastic change of mindset is pivotal to our instinctive urge to celebrate noise and declare our independence from the noise mania. We must recognise that nuisance is a guise that negates the seriousness of this health hazard!
Noise is not just a nuisance; those exposed to excessive noise will suffer from hearing impairment, the gravity of which depends on the noise intensity. This is analogous to the hazard of smoking 20 years ago when smokers believed that tobacco was the safest habit and all else was hogwash!
Malta lacks a cohesive law governing noise. Present laws and regulations regulating noise include: the Police Code; Legal Notice 1 of 2006; the Traffic Code (MVRT regulations, LN. 126) and the EU Traffic Directive (2007/34/EC) and the construction regulations (Development Planning Act, LN 295).
The first two legal provisions perceive noise as a nuisance. That is, loudness is subjective to the individual construal and the time duration is unimportant. Therefore, the observation of such provisions is open to interpretation, hence complaints are subject to a different conclusion.
In the last two, noise is measured in decibels; if the time spent in the noise is known than risk from exposure can be determined. This derives from the fact that prolonged exposure to noise is a health hazard. Therefore, to assess whether noise is a hazard, the sound level and the time exposure are indispensable elements, which must be measured.
Apart from hearing loss, prolonged noise intensity can cause lack of sleep, irritability, heartburn, indigestion, ulcers, high blood pressure and, possibly, heart disease. Prolonged or frequent exposure to excessive noise tends to make the physiological disturbances chronic.
Since the Occupational Health and Safety Authority is the official body for the investigation and abatement of noise, it is crucial that all complaints are directed to it in order to authenticate and carry out noise impact assessments. The top priority from the public's perspective in a noise incident is time; both that taken to investigate the initial complaint and the time it takes to resolve the dispute. Furthermore, the government must provide the necessary tools to assist the OHSA to safeguard public health and quality of life.
In October 2007, the OHSA launched its national strategy on health and safety at work for the years 2007-2012 and emphasis was laid on a number of lacunae. Among them the health and safety watchdog's need for more human resources, in particular the services of architects, occupational psychologists and engineers.
In December 2008, the EU Senior Labour Inspectors' Committee (SLIC), highlighted the OHSA's need for more inspectors and more funding in order to allow it to carry out the full range of duties expected of a national occupational health and safety enforcement entity. This apparent lack of resources is slowing down the development of a number of important initiatives, including the setting up of a formalised and consolidated system for health surveillance.
Unfortunately, today our leaders find the choice between noise and votes rather hazardous. Therefore, as expected, resistance to noise is from top to bottom!