Daphne Caruana Galizia u l-iskandlu ta’ Marsaxlokk

L-istorja interessanti li ħarġet biha Daphne Caruana Galizia permezz ta’ numru ta’ blogposts fuq il-blog tagħha timmerita ftit osservazzjonijiet għax fiha numru ta’ żbalji. Ma nafx min ħa l-iżball, jekk hux l-awtriċi inkella min ta’ l-istorja.

Id-dokument f’forma ta’ kuntratt ippubblikat fuq il-blog ta’ Daphne Caruana Galizia kmieni nhar it-12 ta’ Settembru juri li  Yana u Anne aħwa Mintoff biegħu lill-kumpanija taċ-Ċaqnu, Ginwi Co Ltd, art f’Marsaxlokk b’faċċata fuq Triq iż-Żejtun  u bil-kejl ta’ 5159.59 metri kwadri.

Din l-art, skond Daphne inbiegħet wara li s-sid oriġinali applika għal permess liema permess ġie rifjutat minħabba li l-art “kienet barra miż-żona ta’ żvilupp”.

Issa jiena fittixt fil-pjan lokali tal-area (Il-Pjan għall-Bajja ta’ Marsaxlokk) u sibt li meta dan ġie approvat fl-1995 l-art in kwistjoni kienet diġa tajba għall-iżvilupp. Mort iktar lura sa meta l-Parlament approva l-Pjan Regolatur Temporanju fl-1989 u sibt li anke dakinnhar din l-art kienet inkluża fiż-żona ta’ żvilupp!

Meta rajt dan ma stajtx nifhem kif meta is-sid oriġinali tal-art ippreżenta applikazzjoni fuq l-art din l-applikazzjoni ġiet rifjutata. Il-blog ta’ Daphne jgħidilna u jfissrilna li l-applikazzjoni PA4509/96 ġiet rifjutata u li r-raġuni li ngħatat kienet li l-art ma kienitx tajba għall-iżvilupp.

Meta tmur fuq is-sit tal-MEPA u tara l-applikazzjoni PA4509/96 issib li l-qies tal-art li fuqha is-sid oriġinali (Anthony Cassar Desain) applika kien ta’ 8,200 metru kwadru (tmient elef u mitejn metru kwadru).  L-applikazzjoni tal-1996 fil-fatt hi deskritta hekk fuq is-sit tal-MEPA:   “Proposal for residential development over an area of 0.82h to include two storey semi-detached units with vast tracts of open space, new roads and community facilities.

Dan ifisser li l-art tal-applikazzjoni tal-1996 kienet ferm ikbar mill-art li inbiegħet lill-aħwa Mintoff u li parti minnha kienet tajba għall-iżvilupp u parti oħra x’aktarx li kienet barra miż-żona tal-iżvilupp.

Tibqa’ parti oħra interessanti mill-istorja.

L-art li l-aħwa Mintoff ser idaħħlu €3,610,529 minn fuqha Daphne Caruana Galizia qaltilna li tagħha ħallsu Lm4,000 (jiġifieri  €9318). Din diffiċli biex titwemmen għax żmien il-bħaħan ilu li spiċċa. Iktar u iktar meta d-deċiżjoni li l-art tkun tajba għall-bini ilha żmien twil li ittieħdet.

Mhux qed ngħid li hu tajjeb li ittieħdet id-deċiżjoni illi din l-art tkun tista’ tinbena, imma għall-korrettezza għandu jingħad li d-deċiżjoni dwarha ittieħdet fl-aħħar tas-snin tmenin. Issa x’ġara dakinnhar u għax daħlet fl-iskema ma nafx.

Il-mistoqsija  dwar dan l-hekk imsejjaħ “skandlu” għaldaqstant hi dwar iċ-ċifri li qed jissemmew u jekk dawn humiex korretti.  In partikolari jekk hux veru li s-sid oriġinali kienx daqshekk baħnan li art tajba għall-bini tal-kejl ta’ 5159.59 metri kwadri  irmieha b’Lm4,000 (€9318).

Min jaf, forsi dan kollu hu faċċata li warajha hemm moħbija affarijiet oħra.

Nistennew u naraw!

11 comments on “Daphne Caruana Galizia u l-iskandlu ta’ Marsaxlokk

  1. Carmel, għaliex qed tassumi li meta l-aħwa Mintoff xtraw l-art, din kienet tajba għal bini? L-art xtrawha fl-1986 (kif spjegat Daphne) u daħlet fl-iskema, kif għidt int, lejn l-aħħar tas-snin tmenin, jiġifieri ftit wara li xtrawha.

    Dan mhux xorta skandlu? Anzi, il-kronoloġija turi li la l-ministru Pullicino u lanqas xi ministru ieħor Nazzjonalista m’għandhom risponsabbilta politika ta’ dan.

    L-art Mintoffjana daħlet fl-iskema fl-aħħar xhur tal-gvern Laburista jew l-ewwel xhur ta’ dak Nazzjonalista meta ma kienx hemm Awtorita tal-Ippjanar u kienet għada tirrenja l-konfużżjoni li kien ħalla Lorry Sant.

      • OK, imma meta nbiegħet lill-aħwa Mintoff ma kienitx tajba għal bini. Għalhekk mhux diffiċli temmen li l-valur tagħha kien ta’ Lm4000. Int qed tgħid li diffiċli li din is-somma titwemmen.

        Jien infurmat li l-art daħlet fl-iskema tal-bini fl-1988, jiġifieri xi sena wara li kien hemm gvern ġdid. Naħseb taf iktar minni l-konfużżjoni u diżorganizzazjoni li ħalla warajh il-gvern ta’ KMB u naħseb tapprezza li l-ministru Michael Falzon ma setax ikun jaf x’qed jiġri minn kull biċċa art.

        Jien konvint li Mintoff u/jew uliedu ma qagħdux jistennew li jkun hemm gvern Nazzjonalista biex jibdew il-proċeduri ħalli biċċa green area tingħata għal bini – naħseb li bdewhom hekk kif xtraw l-art fl-1986. Taf ukoll iktar minni li din kienet ħaġa normalissima matul il-gvernijiet Laburisti u li, bid-difetti kollha tagħha, l-MEPA qatgħet dan l-abbuż KWAŻI għal kollox

        L-aħħar punt: jekk tara l-map server tal-MEPA tinnota li hemm overlap bejn parti mis-sit tal-applikazzjoni 4509/96 (ta’ Cassar Desain) u tal-1692/04 (ta’ McKenna). Infatti jekk tikklikkja fuq il-parti t’isfel tas-sit ta’ McKenna, jitilgħu iż-żewġ applikazzjonijiet f’daqqa. Jien stess ħsibt li l-permess kien ġie rifjutat lil wieħed u inħareġ lill-oħra fuq l-istess art (in parti), għax hekk juri l-Mapserver.

      • In vista tal-provedimenti tal-ligi dwar l-Arei ghall-Izvilupp tal-Bini (BDA Act) l-art li inbieghet kellha potenzjal ta’ zvilupp. Anke’ jekk kienet tinhadem ghall-agrikultura dak il-potenzjal mhux rifless fis-uppost prezz ta’ Lm4,000.

        Dwar x’inti infurmat kif ukoll dak li int konvint dwaru, dak affari tieghek

  2. Carmel, you are constantly contradicting yourself. The land was sold in 86,repeat 86 not 96, and you are clearly aware that the boundaries were moved during 1987. So how can you say that it was sold as development land? You seem to have confused yourself.

    Also, are you suggesting that the land was originally sold for a larger amount? Isn’t that besides the point in hand? As arable land could it have been worth 6, 8 or 10,000 lm? it is now worth millions through obvisiously corrupt practices. True, you won’t buy much for 4,000 lm TODAY, but you are referring to a sale of arable land, probably with a registered farmer, which took place 26 years ago.

    I still fail to see what you are trying so desperately to get at. Where exactly did the Cassar de Sain’s benefit? They still own most of the arable land surrounding it, yet it is not ‘tajjeb al bini’.

    I’m sure our history books both tell us that until May 1987 KMB was still ruling our ‘wonderful’ land.

    • The basic events took place so long ago. The legal and political framework was so different. It would however suffice to point out one very important matter which no one has explained so far.

      In 1986 when the sale by Cassar Desain took place, planning was regulated by the Building Development Areas Act of 1983 which Act had repealed the 1962 planning schemes. As a result no land was automatically considered developable nor was it undevelopable.
      The BDA Act allowed development of land outside areas designated as BDA areas on condition that some basic criteria on proximity to other buildings was observed. So, even in 1986 the land sold to the Mintoff sisters was much more than agricultural land. It had development potential in terms of the BDA Act. Consequently it had a value substantially more than the Lm4,000 which it is claimed was the selling price.

      Whether Cassar Desain was aware of this I do not know, but I would not hesitate to say that the buyers were certainly aware.

      As to the “obviously corrupt practices” to whom are you referring? There are various actors but a very limited number of persons were involved in the actual decisions which were taken in 1988-89.

      The decisions taken to include the site in the new development boundaries in 1989 was in my opinion bad policy. But bad policy is not necessarily the result of a “corrupt practice”. It may be the result of for example bullying.

      I await more information with interest!

  3. Carmel, allow me to intervene here too; I already answered part of your arguments in my other reply.

    Just wanted to add that when “bad policy” involves Mintoff and his daughters, the suspicion – the moral conviction, if you will – of abuse and/or corruption becomes very very strong.

    I am of course biased (not prejudiced) against Mintoff but I feel I have good reason to be.

    • Antoine Vella ssibu fit-TOM, Malta Today, il-blogs u kullimkien. Dejjem lest jiccensura kull pastazata li saret taht GonziPN u jipprova jitfa d-dubji f’kull azzjoni li hadu gvernijiet laburisti. Antoine Vella appostlu ta’ GonziPN. Nawguralek tiehu post JPO jew FD jew JM. Grazzi ghal klikka ta’ GonziPN hemm hafna postijiet vakanti. Gd luck

  4. By your line of thinking you should have asked yourself why have the Mintoff sisters sold the land for development a few years ago and not instantly that it became suitable for development in 1987?

    Even further, one has to ask why they did not develop it themselves with the help of their father, then still very active at that time.

  5. Paprata wahda qal dak is-sinjur meta halef li il-MEPA nehhiet dik it-tip ta’ korruzzjoni dwar art hadrana bla permess. Mela vera ma jafx li qieghed jghix go Malta. Li kieku kien ghadu haj certu spekulatur kont nghidlu kemm kien sejjer zball. Il-MEPA tintenn sal-ahhar baqghet.
    Jekk taqra dwar dak li jikteb Karmenu fuq l-ilma taghraf fejn wasluna tal-MEPA bl-izvilupp eccessiv. Permessi fuq art hadrana hargu u gawdew mhux il-bdiewa imma dawk il-mazulin li xtraw bi prezz baxx.

Leave a Reply to Richard Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s