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!

Qabel ma tfaċċa Franco Debono

L-Onorevoli Franco Debono donnu jaħseb li qabel ma tfaċċa hu ħadd qatt ma tkellem dwar il-liġijiet elettorali u l-finanzjament tal-partiti.  Fil-fatt fil-blogpost tiegħu tat-8 ta’ Settembru 2012 qalilna :

“If AD had any sort of rudimentary strategy they would take up my proposals for reform in the electoral law and party financing instead of playing Austin Gatt s game who has been against both.” [Nota miżjuda t-Tnejn 10 ta’ Settembru 2012: il-blogpost hawn fuq ikkwotata jista’ jkun hemm diffikultajiet dwarha għax għal xi hin illum tneħħiet minn fuq il-blog ta’ Franco Debono. Ma kien hemm l-ebda spjegazzjoni għal dan.]

Tajjeb li jkun jaf li id-dinja kienet teżisti ħafna qabel ma tfaċċa Franco Debono.

Alternattiva Demokratika ilha titkellem fuq dawn l-issues (liġijiet elettorali u finanzjament tal-Partiti) għal snin twal u dan flimkien ma issues oħra bħall-Whistleblowers Act u FOI (Freedom of Information Act) sa mit-twaqqif tagħha fl-1989.

Ikun aħjar li kienu min jtkellem u/jew jikteb jiċċekkja ftit l-affarijiet qabel ma jħarbex jew jiftaħ ħalqu.

Franco jgħid biss biċċa …………… aħjar jispjega l-vot tiegħu kontra l-mozzjoni 110

Fuq il-blog tiegħu Franco Debono biex iwieġeb dak li qalet Alternattiva Demokratika dwaru dalgħodu irriproduċa d-diskors li kien għamel fil-Parlament nhar is-6 ta’ Mejju 2012 fejn jitkellem dwar l-impatti tal-estensjoni tal-power station. Jgħid ukoll illi wara d-diskors tiegħu  Austin Gatt ma baqax resposnabbli għall-Enemalta!

Ma nafx kif wasal għal din il-konklużjoni. Imma apparti dan. Il-punt tiegħi hu li meta l-mozzjoni numru 110 tressqet għall-vot Franco Debono ivvota kontra. X’jiswa li tgħid ħafna kliem sabiħ jekk imbagħad dak li tagħmel ma jaqbilx ma dak li tgħid?

Nhar is-6 ta’ Mejju 2010 l-Parlament ivvota fuq il-mozzjoni numru 110 imressqa mill-Opposizzjoni. L-mozzjoni kienet fost oħrajn :

1. Turi nuqqas ta’ qbil dwar il-mod kif mexa l-Gvern fl-estensjoni tal-Power Station,
2. Tesprimi nuqqas ta’ qbil għall-għażliet teknici li saru li f’dan l-istadju warrbu l-gass, ekoloġikament superjuri u ekonomikament orħos għall-konsumaturi,
3. Tikkundanna lil Austin Gatt li ħalla l-pjani jaqgħu lura b’mod li l-power station eżistenti m’hiex tlaħħaq mad-domanda,
4. Tikkundanna t-tibdil fil-leġislazzjoni ambjentali li sar, għax b’hekk biss il-BWSC setgħet tirbaħ il-kuntratt,  l-iskart tossiku li ser ikun iġġenerat, it-tniġġiż iġġenerat mill-Heavy Fuel Oil

Nhar is-6 ta’ Mejju 2010 kienet dik is-seduta li fiha kien hemm taħwida fil-votazzjoni dwar kif fil-fatt ivvutaw Mario Galea u Justyne Caruana. Wara t-taħwida l-Ispeaker iddeċieda li l-Parlament jerġa’ jivvota ħalli jkunu iċċarati l-affarijiet. L-Opposizzjoni dehrilha li dan kien logħob bir-regoli tal-Parlament u ħin minnhom ħarġet il-barra.  Meta l-Ispeaker sejjaħ il-vot mill-ġdid l-Opposizzjoni bi protesta ma ivvutatx.

Il-minuti tal-Parlament  fil-fatt jgħidu hekk :

“ Il-Membri qablu li din il-votazzjoni tittieħed dak il-ħin stess.

Il-Kamra ivvotat hekk:

VOTAZZJONI NRU.  88                                ĦIN: 1.21 am

ĦADD FAVUR

 

KONTRA :  35

L-Onor.

 

Agius David	Galea Mario
Agius Francis	Gatt Austin
Arrigo Robert	Gonzi Lawrence
Azzopardi Frederick	Gonzi Michael
Azzopardi Jason	Gouder Karl
Bonnici Charlo’	Micallef Peter
Borg Tonio	Mifsud Philip
Cassar Joseph	Mifsud Bonnici Carmelo
Cristina Dolores	Mugliett Jesmond
de Marco Mario	Puli Clyde
Debono Franco	Pullicino George
Debono Giovanna	Pullicino Orlando Jeffrey
Deguara Louis	Said Chris
Falzon Joseph	Spiteri Stephen
Farrugia Jean Pierre	Vassallo Edwin
Fenech Tonio	Zammit Ninu
Fenech Adami Beppe	Zammit Dimech Francis
Galea Censu

Il-mozzjoni m’għaddietx.”

 

Hu veru li dak li qed jgħid Franco Debono issa jaqbel ma dak li qal nhar is-6 ta’ Mejju 2010. Imma jibqa’ l-misteru li dakinnhar ivvota kontra. Li jfisser li qal mod u aġixxa mod ieħor.

Naħseb li ħaqqna spjegazzjoni!

Għax mhux biżżejjed li jingħad kliem li jdoqq għall-widna. Fl-aħħar il-vot irid jirrifletti dak li jkun intqal.

Minor footnote to 1980s talks

Much has been written about the meetings between Dom Mintoff and Guido de Marco prior to 1987 on finding ways in which to solve the constitutional crisis resulting from the 1981 perverse electoral results.

During these meetings Mintoff and de Marco undoubtedly also discussed various other matters as they considered appropriate. At one point, I too formed part of their agenda.

It was early in October 1984 and I was carrying out duties of architect and civil engineer at the then Public Works Department. Called to the office of the director, I was informed that, in view of my articles published in newspapers of the Nationalist Party, my employment was being terminated forthwith.

Being without a job was further compounded by the fact that the then Labour government had also withheld my professional warrant.

I initiated human rights proceedings claiming that my right to freedom of expression and protection from discrimination on political grounds had been breached by the Director of Public Works and his minister, Lorry Sant.

The first session of the court case was fixed for early November 1984. Witnesses were heard and submissions made.

Some time in April or May 1985, de Marco called to tell me that he had a message for me from Mintoff. My dismissal from the Public Works Department had cropped up in one of his meetings with Mintoff who had suggested that he would be prepared to take me on board as a civil engineer on the Freeport project, then under his wings and in its early stages.

However, this proposal was subject to the conditions that I had to halt legal proceedings against Sant and, in addition, I had to bind myself not to write any more articles in newspapers.

My response was a clear no.

We met a second time at the request of de Marco, presumably as Mintoff was pressing for an answer. But I did not budge. In view of my refusal, the message was relayed through two alternative routes. De Marco had asked two high-ranking PN officials to persuade me to compromise. Fortunately, they fully understood my position and did not press the matter any further.

On June 27, 1985, just weeks after receiving Mintoff’s message, the case was decided by Mr Justice Joseph Filletti. He concluded that my freedom of expression and my right not to be discriminated against on political grounds were breached by the Director of Public Works. The director, the court ruled, had to shoulder administrative responsibility for the happenings in his department on his own.

Mr Justice Filletti had exonerated the minister!

Subsequent to Mr Justice Filletti’s decision I received a phone call that a senior army officer attached to Mintoff’s office at Kalafrana wanted to speak to me.

I clearly remember that it was an August afternoon in 1985 when I called at his office. This army officer, eventually a colonel, told me that I should not count my chickens yet because, while I had a favourable first decision from the law courts, it was inevitable that it would be reversed on appeal.

He prodded me to accept Mintoff’s proposal and stop legal proceedings. I told the colonel that I had already refused the proposal and that I had no intention of changing my mind.

In the meantime, the Constitutional Court had fixed dates for hearings of the appeals submitted. I myself had submitted an appeal because, in my view, the minister should have been found responsible together with the director for breach of human rights. Proof had been submitted that the instructions for my dismissal had been issued by the minister himself.

The Constitutional Court decided the case on January 29, 1986. It concluded that Sant had, in fact, issued the instructions for my dismissal himself. It further acknowledged that proof of the minister’s direct involvement had been submitted through the evidence of various witnesses.

The Constitutional Court decided that both Sant and the director were responsible for political discrimination.

As to freedom of expression, the Constitutional Court reversed the first court’s decision and concluded that those in public employment sign away their rights of freedom of expression. By accepting public employment, the Constitutional Court held that you renounce your freedom of expression.

As it turned out, it seems that the colonel was most probably bluffing after all.

It was clear to me that Mintoff was trying to find a way out for Sant.

When my name cropped up in the de Marco-Mintoff talks it seems that I was considered as a pawn that could be easily sacrificed in the quest for the larger prize.

Fortunately, matters developed differently in this minor footnote to the de Marco/Mintoff talks.

published in The Times (Malta) 8th September 2012

The accumulated cost of incompetence

After last Monday’s storm the usual comments were read and heard: the damage sustained, the cost to the insurers, the cleaning operations, the near misses.

There was no comment on the real culprit for a substantial part of the damage.

No one commented on the excessive building development taking over agricultural land over the years. No one commented on the building in and along valleys. No one commented on the lack of water cisterns in residential units which although a legal requirement since 1881 is more honoured in the breach.

Who is responsible for all this?

Successive governments and the public administration in the last 50 years is responsible for this mess. It is in fact the cost of incompetence.

The storm would have happened anyway, but :

If all residential units are provided with rainwater cisterns there would certainly be less stormwater gushing around in the streets. Certainly no overflowing sewers as still happens in a number of localities.

If less building development was permitted over the years there would be more land available for the recharge of the aquifer.  We would also have substantially less vacant dwellings

If rubble walls along valleys are properly and regularly maintained there would be less obstruction to the natural flow of water.

If  no dumping of waste occurs in valleys, there would be less obstruction to the natural flow of storm water.

But this has not been so.  Hence the scale of the damage.

The damage caused by last Monday’s storm is the accumulated cost of incompetence.

 

published at di-ve.com on 7 September 2012

Gonzi jħobb jiċċajta

Kemm iħobb jiċċajta Lawrence Gonzi.

Qalilna li l-Gvern hu stabbli. Kullma għandu qal, hu ftit diffikultajiet interni fil-PN.

Hekk ftit huma id-diffikultajiet!

JPO irreżenja mill-PN u illum qiegħed jokkupa siġġu indipendenti fil-Parlament. Jeżiġi li jkun ikkonsultat u wara jara x’jagħmel.

Franco Debono m’huwiex lest (skond ma iddikjara) li jappoġġa Gvern li għandu lill-Austin Gatt bħala Ministru!

Meta darba Gonzi kellu maġġoranza ta’ siġġu wieħed, dawn tgħidilhom ftit diffikultajiet?

Bil-fors tikkonkludi li meta jagħmel użu mill-kelma “stabbli” ma jafx xi tfisser! Inkella m’għandux x’jagħmel u qiegħed  jiċċajta!