Il-burokrazija u l-Belt ta’ Stivala

Xahar wara l-ieħor jibbumbardjawna bi statistika dwar kuntratti ta’ bejgħ tal-propjetà inkella dwar in-numru ta’ konvenji. Dan l-aħħar qieshom inbidlu ftit in-numri b’mod li beda jidher li l-bejgħ qed jonqos.  Dak li jmexxi l-assoċjazzjoni tal-iżviluppaturi qalilna li hi l-burokrazija li qed ittellef ir-ritmu tal-bejgħ.  

Il-proċess tal-permessi għall-iżvilupp, ġeneralment, hu iffukat fid-direzzjoni tar-rgħiba. Ħolqu regoli msejħa regoli tal-flessibilità biex isibu mod kif iduru mar-regoli tal-iżvilupp li oriġinalment saru bl-iskop li jħarsu t-tessut urban u l-kwalità tal-ħajja tal-komunità residenzjali.  Per eżempju, żona intenzjonata għal taraġ pubbliku fil-pjan lokali għall-Gżira għamel il-wisa’ biex tinbena lukanda. Dan qed isir f’żona residenzjali, jiġifieri fejn suppost jinbnew biss djar għan-nies.  Din il-flessibilità estrema fl-ippjanar għall-użu tal-art qed igawdu minnha l-Grupp tal-Kumpaniji Stivala. Dan ngħidu b’referenza għall-parti ta’ fuq ta’ Triq Moroni: żona li r-residenti tal-Gżira illum isibuha bħala l-Belt Stivala. Minkejja dan kollu l-kap tal-MDA għandu l-wiċċ li jilmenta! Qiesu dan mhux biżżejjed.

Żviluppaturi fil-Mellieħa mhumiex daqstant fortunati bir-regoli tal-flessibilità għax lukanda li ħarġilha permess ta’ żvilupp f’ċirkustanzi simili laqqtita meta l-Qorti tal-Appell ħassret il-permess. Il-permess ta’ żvilupp għal lukanda fil-Belt ta’ Stivala għandha ċans li jkollha l-istess destin bħall-dak tal-Mellieħa fil-futur qarib. Għalkemm l-applikazzjoni għall-permess ġie approvat madwar ħames xhur ilu  (PA5962/21) il-permess ta’ żvilupp għadu ma ħarigx.

Kultant l-opinjoni pubblika tiġiha waħda żewġ! Il-protezzjoni riċenti permezz ta’ skedar ta’ Palazzino Vincenti f’San Ġiljan hi materja oħra ta’ kunflitt bejn ta’ Stivala u l-burokrazija tal-ippjanar. Għadu kmieni wisq biex wieħed jista’ jgħid li dan hu każ magħluq.  B’ansjetà u biża’ nistenna l-passi li jmiss, u dan minkejja li hemm xi forma ta’ skedar tal-wirt li ħalla warajh l-Perit Vincenti.

Ta’ Stivala kienu qed jippjanaw li jħottu Palazzino Vincenti u floku, f’San Ġiljan, jiżviluppaw lukanda oħra.  F’Diċembru 2022 Palazzino Vincenti kien protett temporanjament fi Grad 1 permezz ta’ Ordni ta’ Konservazzjoni ta’ Emerġenza.  Din il-protezzjoni temporanja issa spiċċat u flokha għandna protezzjoni fi Grad 2 fuq bażi permanenti kif deċiż mill-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar ix-xahar li għadda. Din mhiex aħbar tajba għax issa probabbilment ser nispiċċaw  bil-faċċata biss ta’ Palazzino Vincenti: ġewwa jispiċċa kollu.

Għal dawk li ferħu bl-aħbar tal-protezzjoni imħabbra, naħseb li għaġġlu. Probabbilment hu biss l-iżviluppatur u l-konsulenti tiegħu li għandhom għax jgħorku jdejhom għax mhux ser ikunu wisq il-bogħod milli jilħqu l-miri tagħhom.

F’dan il-kaz ukoll il-burokrazija tal-ippjanar mhux ser ikun irnexxielha milli żżomm lil ta’ Stivala milli jagħmlu ħerba mill-wirt nazzjonali. Kollox bil-barka tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar.

Il-burokrazija tal-ippjanar li minnha jilmenta l-Kap tal-MDA l-anqas ma kienet tidher b’nemes meta ta’ Stivala ġiehom il-ħsieb li jġebbdu l-iżvilupp sat-tarf tal-kosta. Tiftakru? Erba’ snin ilu f’din il-paġna, f’artiklu ntitolat : Il-ħarsien tal-kosta: ma hemmx rieda politika (Illum: 14 t’ April 2019) kont ktibt dwar il-permess ta’ żvilupp tal-blokk bini fejn kien hemm ir-restorant Piccolo Padre mal-kosta ta’ San Ġiljan. Kont emfasizzajt dan li ġej: “L-iżvilupp in kwistjoni ngħata permess fuq art mal-kosta.  B’żieda ma dan …………………. jidher ċar li l-binja tibqa’ ħierġa fuq il-baħar.  Jidher li l-Awtorità tal-Artijiet l-anqas biss tniffset dwar dan.” Minkejja dak li jgħid il-Kap tal-MDA, il-burokrazija tal-ippjanar (u l-kuġini tagħha) kontinwament tagħmel il-wisa’ għal żvilupp bla rażan.  

Din hi l-effettività tal-burokrazija: dejjem fuq in-naħa tar-rgħiba.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 28 ta’ Mejju 2023

Bureaucracy and Stivalaland

Month in month out we are inundated with the latest statistics on property contracts or “promise of sale” agreements. Recently we have had some blips with statistics indicating that property sales were possibly diminishing. Out comes the Malta Developers Association (MDA) supremo thundering that bureaucracy is holding back property deals.

The development permitting process is, generally, greed oriented. It has resulted in so-called flexibility policies which seek to facilitate going around development policy restrictions intended to protect the urban fabric and the quality of life of the residential community. For example, an area earmarked for a public staircase in the Gżira local plan was transformed into a hotel. This is taking place in a residential area where only residences ought to have been permitted. The beneficiary of such land use planning extreme flexibility is the Stivala Group of Companies. I am referring to upper Moroni Street in Gżira, which area has nowadays been labelled as Stivalaland by Gżira residents. Yet the MDA supremo has the cheek to complain.

Developers in Mellieħa were less lucky with flexibility bureaucracy as a hotel permitted in similar circumstances has seen its development permit being recently revoked by the Court of Appeal. The Stivalaland hotel permit in Gżira may possibly meet the same fate in the not-too-distant future as although it has been approved by the Planning Commission some 5 months ago (PA5962/21) the development permit has not been issued yet. Consequently, the time frame for objectors to commence the appeal process has not yet commenced.

Occasionally public opinion manages to pull a fast one. The recent scheduling of the Palazzino Vincenti landmark at St Julians is another area of conflict between the Stivala brand and planning bureaucracy. It is still too early to consider this as a closed case. One awaits with trepidation the next steps notwithstanding the scheduling of the Vincenti masterpiece.

The Stivala brand had planned to pull down Palazzino Vincenti and to develop yet another hotel in St Julians. On 12 December 2022 Palazzino Vincenti was temporarily protected at Grade 1 level through an Emergency Conservation Order. This temporary protection has now been lifted and downgraded to a Grade 2 protection on a long-term basis as decided by the Planning Authority last month. This is extremely bad news as it signifies that most probably only the elevation of this landmark will be preserved: its interior will be gutted. Those who rejoiced at this level of protection were ill-advised. I think that it will be the developer and his advisors who will eventually have the last laugh as they will not be too far from their original objectives!

In this specific case planning bureaucracy will, once more, not be preventing the Stivala brand from making mincemeat of our national heritage, with the Planning Authority’s blessing. And yet the MDA supremo complains.

The planning bureaucracy which the MDA supremo complains about was nowhere to be seen when the Stivala brand sought to stretch development as close as possible to the shoreline. Do you remember? Four years ago, in these very columns, in an article entitled: Protecting Our Coast: No political will in sight (TMIS: 14 April 2019) I had written about the development permit relative to the building block of which the restaurant Piccolo Padre along the St Julian’s coastline forms part. I had then emphasised as follows: “The development in question has been permitted on a footprint starting along the coastline itself. In addition, ………………… planning permission issued by the Planning Authority includes part of the approved structure protruding over the sea. Not even a whimper has been heard from the Lands Authority on the matter.”

Contrary to what the MDA supremo says land use planning bureaucracy, and its cousins, continuously make way for unbridled development.

That is the extent of how effective the bureaucracy is, practically always on the side of greed.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 28 May 2023

In-Nigret: more agricultural land to be bulldozed

The local plans are seven in number. They are supplemented by a land use planning rationalisation exercise. This consists of the identification of land outside the development zone (ODZ), approximately 2 million square metres in area, on the outskirts of existing urban areas and settlements all over the islands. In July 2006, Parliament, decided that this ODZ land was suitable for development.

The PN led government had then proposed and voted in favour of developing this ODZ land with the Labour Opposition voting against the proposal. But come March 2013 nothing changed as a result of the change in government. Notwithstanding that Labour in Opposition had voted against the proposal, the ODZ land remained within the development zone. All two million square metres of it. As aptly underlined by Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa in his Il Gattopardo: the more things appear to change the more they remain the same. Greed is in fact colour blind.

Today, almost 17 years after the event, our local communities are realising what that Parliamentary vote signifies. Together with my colleagues I have been all around the island on a regular basis discussing with residents the resulting overdevelopment which is eating up agricultural land at a fast rate. Most localities are impacted.

This week it is the turn of agricultural land at In-Nigret, on the outskirts of Żurrieq, where more agricultural land will soon be cleared for development. Residents are up in arms as they have realised that another 14,960 square metres of arable agricultural land will be shortly developed. Two particular applications for planning control have been submitted (PC85/18 and PC49/19). The former application has already been approved last year while the second application will be considered shortly: it has already been recommended for approval by the Planning Directorate at the Planning Authority.

The planning process currently in hand is concerned with zoning and with determining the extent of permissible development, that is the permissible height and the development density. The development has however already been approved in principle 17 years ago. Unfortunately, notwithstanding the efforts of my party as well as those of environmental NGOs, residential communities ignored the warning signs staring them in the face. Now that the threat of destructive development is approaching individual communities, they are realising that they have been taken for a ride for quite some time. They are now awakening from their blissful slumber, suddenly realising that those whom they trusted all along have betrayed them by giving up for development the open spaces surrounding our settlements and urban areas.

Giving up agricultural land for building development does not make any sense. This is not just an objective argument in favour of protecting agricultural land. It is also essential to protect the green lungs around our urban areas and settlements.

What sense does it make to embark on a €700 million spending spree on the greening of our urban environment and then, simultaneously to bulldoze through our fertile fields? Project Green, if it is to have any worth should first and foremost seek to protect our existing green lungs. This applies not only to the Nigret fields facing the bulldozer in the coming months. It also applies all around the islands to each and every one of the two million square metres of ODZ land which Parliament, 17 years ago, earmarked for development.

The question being asked is: what can be done about it? Is it not too late to act after 17 years? There are very few avenues which can be explored at this late hour but there are some possibilities which hopefully can be utilised to defend the little we have been left with. 

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 21 May 2023

Riforma tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar

Il-Prim Ministru Robert Abela, fid-diskors tiegħu tal-Ewwel ta’ Mejju, qal li ser jagħti bidu għal riforma fil-qasam tal-ippjanar tal-użu tal-art. Ftit li xejn ta’ dettalji. Fi kliemu, imma, kien ċar li kien qed jipprova jsewwi l-ħsara li rriżultat mill-kritika li saret f’dawn il-jiem minn żewġ Sindki Laburisti. Wieħed minnhom (Christian Zammit – Sindku tax-Xagħra) irriżenja, għax xebbgħuh. L-ieħor, Conrad Borg Manché, Sindku tal-Gżira, baqa’ għaddej. Idu msaħħa riżultat ta’ rebħa fil-Qrati li kellu kontra l-Awtorità tal-Artijiet u d-deċiżjoni tagħha li tieħu lura biċċa mill-ġnien tal-Gżira biex tagħmel il-wisa’ għal pompa tal-petrol.

Bħas-soltu, l-Partit Laburista jipprova jingħoġob ma’ kulħadd. Il-Mexxej tal-Partit Laburista ifaħħar l-impenn ambjentali taż-żewġ sindki. Imma oħrajn fit-tmexxija tal-partit, fl-istess ħin, kontinwament jiddefendu lil min qed jagħmlilhom xogħolhom bħala sindki diffiċli.

Il-problema bażika tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar hi li kontinwament tinjora ir-regoli tal-ippjanar tagħha stess. Għal din ir-raġuni, din il-ġimgħa stess, il-Qorti tal-Appell ħassret żewġ deċiżjonijiet oħra tal-istess Awtorità tal-Ippjanar.

Ir-residenti, kif ukoll uħud mill-kunsilli lokali, kontinwament qed isemmgħu leħinhom kontra kull xorta ta’ deċiżjoni tal-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar. Il-permess għall-iżvilupp mill-ġdid tal-villaġġ tal-Mistra kien ħareġ għall-ewwel darba fl- 2013 għal żvilupp b’għoli ta’ tnax-il sular. Ir-residenti opponew it-tiġdid ta’ dan il-permess minħabba li dan mhux kompatibbli mar-regoli tal-ippjanar li huma fis-seħħ illum. It-Tribunal ta’ Reviżjoni għall-Ambjent u l-Ippjanar (EPRT) ma aċċettax l-appell tar-residenti, imma l-Qorti tal-Appell waqqfet kollox u bagħtet il-file lura biex il-każ ikun eżaminat mill-ġdid. Dan, il-Qorti għamlitu, għax ikkonkludiet li t-talbiet tar-residenti ma ġewx eżaminati sewwa mill-EPRT.

Fid-dawl ta’ din id-deċiżjoni tal-Qorti tal-Appell ikun floku li wieħed jistaqsi “il-għala, dawk li jieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet tal-ippjanar, kontinwament jinjoraw ir-regoli”? Xi snin ilu kien l- Ombudsman innifsu li wasal għall-istess konklużjoni.

Dan il-kaz mhux xi eċċezzjoni!

Nhar l-Erbgħa, l-Qorti tal-Appell, tat deċiżjoni oħra, din id-darba dwar żvilupp fil-Mellieħa. Aċċettat appell li sar mill-Kunsill Lokali tal-Mellieħa u ħassret permess ta’ żvilupp għal-lukanda (bil-faċilitajiet anċillari għaliha) liema permess kien inħareg f’żona fejn dan l-iżvilupp ma jistax isir ħlief f’ċirkustanzi eċċezzjonali. Din il-lukanda ta’ tmien sulari hi konnessa mal-interessi tal-iżviluppatur Għawdxi Joseph Portelli.

L-applikazzjoni għall-ewwel kien hemm il-parir dwarha (bil-miktub) biex din tkun rifjutata. Imma l-Kummissjoni għall-Kontroll tal-Iżvilupp ma qablitx ma’ dan u approvat il-ħruġ ta’ permess. Dan il-permess ġie ikkonfermat ukoll mit-Tribunal ta’ Reviżjoni għall-Ambjent u l-Ippjanar  (EPRT). L-EPRT l-anqas ma qabel li joħroġ ordni biex ma jsirx xogħol fuq is-sit sakemm jinqata’ l-appell. Riżultat ta’ hekk, il-lukanda li issa tilfet il-permess għax dan ġie mħassar mill-Qorti tal-Appell hi issa lesta u mibnija! Ser ikunu meħtieġa alterazzjonijiet sostanzjali u probabbilment partijiet minn dik li hi lukanda jkollhom jitwaqqgħu minħabba li dan l-iżvilupp ibbenefika minn bonus ta’ żewġ sulari extra li jingħataw għall-iżvilupp tal-lukandi! Jiġifieri dawn kellhom żieda ta’ żewġ sulari fuq dak li hu normali f’dawn iż-żoni! Dawn iż-żewġ sulari ma’ jistgħux ikunu approvati f’ċirkustanzi oħra. GħaIhekk ikollhom jaqgħu!

Dan kollu juri kemm hu possibli li bir-regoli tal-ippjanar tal-lum (anke jekk hemm bosta difetti fihom) xorta hu possibli li wieħed jasal għal deċiżjonijiet raġjonevoli kif uriet il-Qorti tal-Appell!  Ovvjament id-deċiżjonijiet ikunu raġjonevoli jekk dawk li jeħduhom ikun kapaci li jimxu mar-regoli dejjem.

L-ippjanar għall-użu tal-art hu għan-nies. Kif qed nagħtu każ tan-nies fl-ippjanar għall-użu tal-art li għandna? Jekk insegwu l-kazijiet diversi hekk kif dawn jiżviluppaw, hu ċar li dawk li huma maħtura biex jassiguraw li l-affarijiet jimxu sewwa, fl-interess tan-nies u tal-kwalità tal-ħajja tagħhom, qed iħarbtu kollox. Dan hu ċar meta wieħed jara d-diversi deċiżjonijiet tal-Qorti,mhux biss dawk li nsemmi hawn fuq, imma bosta oħra ukoll.

Huwa dan li jeħtieġ li jkun indirizzat minn riforma tal-proċess tal-ippjanar għall-użu tal-art. Jeħtieġ nassiguraw li dawk li jieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet ikunu nies kapaċi jiddeċiedu sewwa: konsistenti u skond ir-regoli fis-seħħ. X’nambuhom ir-regoli jekk b’mod konsistenti jiġu injorati?

Din hi r-riforma meħtieġa fl-ippjanar għall-użu tal-art.

pubblikat fuq Illum:14 ta’ Mejju 2023

Reforming the Planning Authority

Prime Minister Robert Abela, during his May Day speech, hinted that he will embark on a land use planning reform. His speech was very scant on details. It was however clearly an exercise in damage control after the Labour Party has faced sharp criticism from two of its own Mayors, one of whom (Christian Zammit – Xagħra Mayor) has quit the party in disgust. The other, Conrad Borg Manché, Gżira Mayor, soldiers on. His hand has been strengthened as a result of the Gżira Court case win against the Lands Authority and its decision to reduce the size of the Gżira public garden to make way for a fuel station.

The Labour Party is, as always, running with the hares and simultaneously hunting with the hounds. Party Leader Robert Abela lauds his “environmentalist” mayors. Others within the Labour Party hierarchy, however, are busy defending those who are making their life miserable.

The problem with the Planning Authority is that basically it is ignoring its own policies which it is stretching well beyond any elastic limit. Only this week, for this very reason, the Court of Appeal has cancelled two land use planning decisions.

Residents, and some local councils, are up in arms against all sorts of decisions being taken by the Planning Authority. The permit relative to the Mistra Village re-development was originally issued by the Planning Authority in 2013 for a 12-floor high-rise development. The renewal of the development permit was contested by residents on the grounds of its incompatibility with currently existing planning policies. The Environment Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) shot down the residents’ appeal but the Court of Appeal thought otherwise and sent the case back to the drawing board. The Court of Appeal has pointed out that the EPRT had not examined adequately the applicable planning policies to ascertain or otherwise the residents’ claims.

In view of this Court of Appeal decision it is pertinent to ask as to why those taking planning decisions continuously ignore planning policies? Some years back it was the Ombudsman himself who had arrived at a similar conclusion.

This is not a one-off case.

Last Wednesday the Court of Appeal delivered another decision relative to a development in Mellieħa and accepted the Mellieħa Local Councl’s appeal to cancel a development permit for a hotel with related amenities in an area where the local plan forbids hotel development, except in extraordinary circumstances. This eight-floor hotel is linked to the extensive commercial interests of Gozitan construction magnate Joseph Portelli.

The original written recommendation for a refusal of the application was overturned by the Planning Commission. The development permission wassubsequently confirmed by the EPRT. The EPRT also refused to issue an order to halt construction until the planning appeal is determined. As a result, the hotel whose permit has now been repealed is now completed! It will have to be extensively altered and possibly parts of it will now have to be demolished as the constructed hotel even benefitted from an additional two-floor bonus over and above the prevailing permissible height! These two floors are not permissible in other circumstances and will then have to be demolished.

All this proves that even on the basis of existing planning policies (which need substantial improvement) one can arrive at reasonable decisions as clearly demonstrated by the Court of Appeal, if only those running the show are capable of strictly observing the rules.

Land use planning is for people.  How are people and their needs factored in our land use planning? Following the various land use planning cases as they develop, it is clear that land use planning is hijacked by those appointed to run the show. This is crystal clear when one examines the different decisions of the Court of Appeal. This refers not just to the decisions referred to above, but to many others too!

This is what a reform of the planning process should address: ensuring that the land use planning decision takers are capable of taking decisions which are both consistent and in line with existing policy. What do we need policy for if it is consistently ignored?

This is the reform required in land use planning.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 14 May 2023

Id-demokrazija lokali tista’ tħares l-ispazji urbani mħaddra

Għandna ħtieġa ta’ iktar spazji mħaddra fiz-zoni urbani. L-ispazji mħaddra huma ta’ għajnuna biex insaħħu, u fejn meħtieġ nistabilixxu mill-ġdid il-kuntatt tagħna man-natura. Dawn il-kuntatti ħadu daqqa sewwa riżultat tal-iżvilupp eżaġerat ta’ madwarna. Dan kollu hu ħtija ta’ Awtorità tal-Ippjanar li tat prijorità lill-iżvilupp esaġerat a skapitu tal-kwalità tal-ħajja tagħna lkoll.

Il-Kunsilli Lokali għandhom rwol importanti ħalli jassiguraw il-ħarsien tal-ispazji miftuħa mħaddra biex dawn ma jispiċċawx għalf ħalli jissodisfaw l-aptit tal-iżviluppaturi. Il-parti l-kbira tal-Kunsilli Lokali jsemmgħu leħinhom biex jiddefendu lill-lokalità tagħhom. Sfortunatament ma hemm l-ebda garanzija li jistgħu jaslu u dan għax il-gvern lokali hu biss ittollerat mill-gvern ċentrali.

L-aħħar eżempju, dak tal-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira, immexxi b’tant għaqal mis-Sindku Conrad Borg-Manché, għandu jkun ta’ twissija għal kulħadd. Fil-battalja legali li l-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira fetaħ dwar il-ġnien pubbliku kontra l-Awtorità tal-Artijiet ġie stabilit b’ċertezza li din l-Awtorità naqset milli twettaq żewġ miżuri bażiċi ta’ governanza tajba: naqset milli tkun trasparenti f’ħidmietha u naqset ukoll milli tikkonsulta mal-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira. 

Din hi problema li qed titfaċċa ta’ sikwit min-naħa tal-gvern ċentrali u l-agenżiji tiegħu li għandhom ħabta jibqgħu għaddejjin romblu minn fuq il-kunsilli lokali f’Malta u Għawdex. Il-gvern ċentrali għadu mhux komdu li jaġixxi f’kuntest fejn tirrenja s-sussidjarjetà u d-demokrazija lokali u dan minkejja li l-kunsilli lokali ilhom magħna għal kważi tletin sena.

Kemm il-darba jsir xogħol bil-galbu hi politika tajba li ninvestu fl-iżvilupp ta’ spazji miftuħa fiż-żoni urbani u l-madwar, u li dawn inħaddruhom.  Ikun, imma, għaqli jekk l-ewwel u qabel kollox inħarsu l-ispazji mħaddra li diġa għandna fiz-zoni urbani.

Ħarsu lejn il-ġnien pubbliku tal-Gżira u l-ġara tiegħu l-pompa tal-petrol.  Dawk li jfasslu l-politika tal-Awtorità tal-Artijiet u dik ta’ Project Green għandhom jaħsbu ftit dwar x’futur jista’ għandhom il-pompi tal-petrol. L-elettrifikazzjoni tal-karozzi daqt magħna u konsegwenza ta’ hekk ftit ftit tibda tonqos l-utilità tal-pompi tal-petrol, sakemm ma jkollniex bżonnhom iktar.  Hemm imbagħad il-mira tal-istrateġija tal-iżvilupp sostenibbli li l-karozzi fit-toroq jonqsu b’41 fil-mija. Dan kollu għandu jwassal b’mod loġiku għall-konsiderazzjoni li iktar jagħmel sens li tispiċċa l-pompa tal-petrol biex tagħmel il-wisa’ għal ġnien pubbliku ikbar. Dan jagħmel sens ferm iktar milli joqgħodu jnaqqru biċċiet mill-ġnien pubbliku biex ikabbru d-daqs tal-pompa tal-petrol!

Meta jirnexxielna nreġġgħu lura l-impatti tal-iżvilupp, nagħtu spinta tajba biex intejbu l-kwalità tal-ħajja ta’ kulħadd, mhux biss fil-Gżira!  Huwa f’dan il-qasam fejn jista’ jkollna bidla bis-serjetà fil-politika u l-azzjoni relattiva dwar l-ispazji miftuħa u mħaddra fiż-żoni urbani tagħna.  Hu faċli li troxx il-fondi pubbliċi fuq art abbandunata jew art fi stat ta’ telqa: €700 miljun faċli tonfoqhom b’dan il-mod! L-isfida qegħda biex tkun indirizzata l-ħsara li l-iżviluppaturi jikkawżaw fl-infrastruttura urbana li hi tant essenzjali biex nibqgħu f’kuntatt man-natura. Dan il-kuntatt tant essenzjali, jzommna b’saħħitna, anke mentalment, u jgħin sostanzjalment biex titjieb il-kwalità tal-ħajja!

Din hi t-triq realistika l-quddiem. Jeħtieġ li l-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà jkun prinċipju bażiku tal-governanza tajba kif ukoll li nassiguraw li jkunu l-Kunsilli Lokali li jmexxu dak kollu meħtieġ għall-iżvilupp u ż-żamma f’kundizzjoni tajba tal-infrastruttura urbana lokali, inkluż l-ispazji miftuħa mħaddra.

Il-Gvern ċentrali, permezz tal-Awtorità tal-Artijiet u Project Green, għandu jservi lid-demokrazija lokali flok ma jkompli jipprova joħnoqha.

Din hi l-lezzjoni li toħroġ mill-ġnien tal-Gżira.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 7 ta’ Mejju 2023

Local democracy can protect our urban green spaces

We need more green open spaces in our urban areas. Green open spaces help us strengthen and where necessary re-establish our links with the natural world. These links have been severely impacted by the overdevelopment around us and by a Planning Authority which has prioritised overdevelopment at the expense of our quality of life.

Local Councils have a very important role to play in order to ensure that existing green open spaces are protected and do not continue to serve as fodder for the development lobby. Most Local Councils speak up to defend their locality. Unfortunately, success is not guaranteed as local government is, unfortunately, merely tolerated by central government.

The latest case, that of the Gżira Local Council, ably led by its Mayor Conrad Borg-Manché, should be an eyeopener. In its legal battle on the threatened public garden, the Gżira Local Council established beyond doubt that the Lands Authority failed the basic tests of good governance: the Lands Authority did not act transparently and in addition it has failed to consult with the Gżira Local Council.

This is a recurring problem with central government and its agencies who unfortunately tend to ride roughshod over local councils in Malta and Gozo. Central government is not yet sensitised to subsidiarity and local democracy notwithstanding that local councils have been around for almost thirty years.

Investing in the development of new green open spaces in our urban areas, or within easy reach, is good policy, if done properly. It would be much better, however, if existing green spaces in our urban areas are adequately protected. Much still needs to be done to achieve this objective.

Consider the Gżira public garden and its neighbour the fuel station. Policy makers at the Lands Authority and at Project Green should think about whether fuel stations have any future at all. The electrification of transport is in the pipeline and consequently it is only a question of time before fuel stations start the countdown leading to their disappearance. Coupled with the sustainable development strategy targeted reduction of 41 per cent of cars on the road this should lead to the logical consideration that it makes more sense for the fuel station to make way for an enlarged public garden instead of having parts of the public garden being nibbled away by the fuel station.

Reversing the impacts of development, for a change, could do wonders for our quality of life, not only in Gżira! This is where real changes are required to policies and action relative to the provision of green open spaces in our urban areas. It is relatively easy to splash public funds on abandoned or derelict land: all 700 million euros of it. The real challenge is where the development lobby is destructing or has already destructed the urban infrastructure which should keep us in contact with nature and as a result enhance our sanity and quality of life!

This is the realistic way forward. We should seek to apply subsidiarity as an operating principle of good governance, and ensure that local authorities take the lead in all matters concerning the development and enhancement of the local urban infrastructure, including that is, of green open spaces.

Central government, in this case through the Lands Authority and Project Green, should be at the service of local democracy instead of continuously seeking ways to strangle it. The local voice should lead the way and it should not be suffocated any longer.

This is the basic lesson from the Gżira garden saga.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 7 May 2023

Fil-Gżira: grazzi lil Conrad

Illum ADPD morna l-Gżira fil-ġnien mhedded minn pompa tal-petrol.

Hu tajjeb li l-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira immexxi mis-Sindku Conrad Borg-Manché ħareġ għonqu biex jiddefendi l-ġnien tant meħtieġ għar-residenti.

Il-ġnien hu pulmun essenzjali li jeħtieġ li jikber mhux li jiċkien!

Hi ħasra li f’din l-istorja kollha l-bqija tal-Partit Laburista ħa posizzjoni kontra r-residenti. L-Awtorità tal-Artijiet, immexxija minn Bord maħtur mill-Partit Laburista fil-Gvern, irid jieħu biċċa mill-ġnien għall-ħtiġijiet tal-pompa tal-petrol. L-Awtorità tal-Artijiet qabbded lill-Avukatessa Ramona Attard, President tal-Partit Laburista, biex tiddefendi d-deċiżjoni tagħha dwar il-pompa tal-petrol.

Hi ħasra li l-affarijiet żviluppaw b’dan il-mod.

Għax f’fora oħra l-Gvern tal-Labour qed jgħid affarijiet oħra.

Hu tajjeb per eżempju li tnieda investiment sostanzjali fil-ħolqien u ż-żamma ta’ spazji urbani ħodor. Apparti li l-affarijiet jistgħu jitmexxew aħjar, l-idea hi tajba. Fuq kollox kien ikun ħafna aħjar kieku l-inizjattiva qegħda f’idejn il-Kunsilli Lokali, flok f’idejn Steve Ellul ta’ Project Green li iktar hu interessat li jħejji soda għalih għall-Parlament Ewropew!

Qabel ma noħolqu spazji urbani mħaddra ġodda kien ikun iktar għaqli li nipproteġu dak li għandna.

Grazzi lill-Kunsill Lokali tal-Gżira u lis-Sindku Conrad Borg-Manché li kienu kapaċi jiddefendu il-ftit li għandna. Moħħna hemm għax l-istorja ma spiċċatx hawn!

Nirrikunsidraw is-sussidji tal-enerġija, l-ilma u l-fuel

Bla ebda dubju hu l-każ li l-użu tal-enerġija u l-ilma jkun issussidjat f’dan il-mument ta’ kriżi. Dan is-sussidju għandu jkun immirat biex jindirizza l-impatti soċjali ta’ żieda fil-prezz tal-enerġija u l-ilma sakemm nibqgħu taħt l-effett tal-impatti tal-invażjoni tal-Ukrajina. M’għandniex nieħdu t-triq il-faċli li twassal għal abbuż minn fondi pubbliċi imferrxa fuq kulħadd.

Is-sussidji għandhom ikunu indirizzat lejn min għandu l-ħtieġa tagħhom. Xi ħtieġa hemm li tissussidja lil min għandu l-mezzi biex ikampa?

Il-konsum bażiku tal-enerġija u l-ilma fid-djar tagħna għandu definittivament jibqa’ protett bis-sussidji għaż-żmien li ġej. Din hi neċessità soċjali biex primarjament ikunu mħarsa l-vulnerabbli u dawk bi dħul baxx. Imma lil hinn mis-sussidji applikati għal dan il-konsum basiku ta’ enerġija u ilma ma hemm l-ebda raġuni biex dan is-sussidju jkun japplika għal konsum iktar minn dak bażiku. Min għandu l-mezzi li jwasslu għal konsum ikbar għandu jkollu ukoll ir-riżorsi biex jerfa’ l-ispiża addizzjonali tal-konsum tiegħu jew tagħha.

Ma hemm xejn ikkumplikat f’dak li qed ngħid. Huwa l-mod kif wara kollox diġa jinħadmu l-kontijiet għall-ilma li nikkunsmaw: il-konsum bażiku tal-ilma jitħallas b’rati sussidjati, filwaqt li konsum ikbar tal-ilma diġa jitħallas b’rati kummerċjali. M’għandu jkun hemm l-ebda diffikultà li dan jinftiehem: huwa l-mod kif il-kontijiet tal-ilma ilhom jinħadmu għal iktar minn tletin sena!

Dan kollu hu ukoll dibattibbli meta nikkunsidraw il-konsum ta’ ilma u l-enerġija meta dan il-konsum ma jsirx fir-residenzi. Hu raġjonevoli li napplikaw is-sussidji biex inħarsu l-impiegi. Jeħtieġ imma li s-sussidji jkunu iffukati. Ikun għaqli għalhekk li perjodikament neżaminaw mill-ġdid il-kif u l-kemm b’mod li dawn is-sussidji jkunu raġjonevoli u mhux iktar milli nifilħu bħala pajjiż.

Ma jagħmilx sens imma, li l-użu kollu tal-enerġija u l-ilma jkun issussidjat. Hu meħtieġ li r-riżorsi limitati li għandna nużawhom bir-reqqa.

Iżda l-kaz tas-sussidji għall-konsum tal-fuels, jiġifieri s-sussidji applikati għall-petrol u d-dijżil hi storja kompletament differenti. Il-Gvern diġa, wara ftit ġimgħat, biddel ftit il-proposta oriġinali tiegħu billi ma baqax jissussidja l-konsum tal-fuel (primarjament dijżil) fil-każ ta’ opri tal-baħar imdaqqsa.

Ma hemm l-ebda ħtieġa soċjali biex ikun issussidjat il-petrol u d-dijżil. In-numru żgħir ta’ każi fejn l-użu ta’ karozzi privati hu meħtieġ biex tkun indirizzata d-diżabilita konnessa mal-mobilità jistgħu faċilment ikollhom għajnuna iffukata għall-ħtiġijiet partikolari tagħhom.

It-tneħħija tas-sussidji fuq il-konsum tal-fuel ikun ifisser żieda sostanzjali fil-prezz tal-petrolu u d-dijżil. L-impatt ewlieni tat-tneħħija ta’ dan is-sussidju fuq jkun wieħed pożittiv għax iwassal għal tnaqqis immedjat ta’ karozzi mit-toroq tagħna. Dan iwassal ukoll għal titjib fil-kwalità tal-arja.

Tajjeb li uħud jiftakru li 50 fil-mija tal-vjaġġi li nagħmlu bil-karozzi privati fit-toroq tagħna huma vjaġġi għal distanzi qosra. Il-parti l-kbira ta’ dawn il-vjaġġi, bi prezz rejalistiku tal-petrol u d-dijżil ma jsirux u minflok jintuża t-trasport pubbliku jew forom oħra ta’ mobilità sostenibbli. It-trasport pubbliku kif nafu hu bla ħlas!

Il-partiti parlamentari presentement qed jargumentaw b’veduti dijametrikament opposti. Min-naħa l-waħda l-Labour irid jibqa’ b’sussidji fuq il-konsum kollu filwaqt li l-PN qed jargumenta favur li dawn is-sussidji jkunu eliminati. Dan il-kuntrast bejn il-PLPN  dwar iż-żamma jew it-tneħħija tas-sussidji iħawwad l-imħuħ. Neħtieġu nimxu bir-raġuni anke meta nitkellmu dwar is-sussidji f’dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi.

Ir-riżorsi tagħna huma limitati. Irridu nużawhom bil-għaqal biex inkunu nistgħu nibqgħu ngħinu lill-vulnerabbli.

ippubblikat fuq Illum: 30 t’April 2023

Revisiting energy, water and fuel subsidies

There is definitely a case to make in favour of subsidised energy and water use in this particular time of crisis. This should be aimed at mitigating the social impacts of an increase in energy and water rates for as long as the impacts of the Ukraine invasion remain. We should not, however, take the easier way out and splash public funds around indiscriminately. Subsidies should be focused on those who need them. Why subsidise those who can cope?

The basic energy and water consumption of residential households should definitely remain protected and subject to subsidies in the medium term. This is a social necessity in order, primarily to protect the vulnerable and low earners. However, beyond subsidies applied to basic and essential energy (and water) consumption, there are no valid reasons for the current across the board energy/water subsidies of residential households. Those who can afford to run large domestic properties should be able to shoulder the increased cost of the energy and water which they consume.

This is not rocket science. It is in fact the manner in which we are already billed for our water consumption: basic water consumption is billed at subsidised rates whilst beyond that, commercial rates apply. It should not be too difficult to understand: it is how our water bills have been computed for the past thirty years or so!

The matter is also debatable when considering non- residential energy and water consumption. When protecting existing employment, in the short to medium term, subsidies to energy and water rates are reasonable. Beyond that, however one needs to be more focused and revisit the workings to determine whether and the extent to which such subsidies may be reasonable and affordable to the national exchequer.

Blanket long-term energy and water subsidies for non-residential use are not on. We must be capable of living within our limited means.

The case of subsidies applied to fuel consumption, that is to say subsidies applied to petrol and diesel use is completely different. Government has already after a few weeks tweaked its original decision and removed the applicability of subsidies when applied to fuel consumption (primarily diesel) in the case of large boats.

There is generally no social need to subsidise petrol and diesel. The small number of cases where private vehicle use is required to address issues of disability can be addressed directly by introducing adequate focused help.

Removal of fuel subsidies would signify a substantial increase in the price of petrol and diesel. The primary impact of the removal of subsidies applied to petrol and diesel would be beneficial as it would signify an immediate reduction of cars from our roads and a consequent immediate improvement in air quality.

Some may need to be reminded that 50 per cent of private car trips on our roads is for the travelling of short distances. Most of these trips could, as a result of a realistic price of fuel, be shifted to public transport or other alternative modes of sustainable mobility.  As we know public transport is free of charge.

The Parliamentary parties are at present arguing on two diametrically opposed views. On one hand Labour is emphasising the need of complete subsidisation while the PN is in favour of the complete removal of these subsidies. The contrasting views on the retention of subsidies or their negation, advocated by PLPN, are not at all helpful. We need reasonableness even when considering the application of subsidies in such situations.

Our resources are limited. We must use them judiciously in order to be able to continue helping the vulnerable.

published in the Malta Independent on Sunday : 30 April 2023