Ignoring residents and their local councils

strait street valletta 2

 

Government has published a consultation document dealing with the use of open public spaces by catering establishments, entitled Guidelines on Outdoor Catering Areas on Open Public Space : a holistic approach to creating an environment of comfort and safety.

This document was launched earlier this week at a press conference addressed by the Minister for Tourism Edward Zammit Lewis and the Parliamentary Secretary responsible for planning and simplification of administrative processes Michael Falzon.

The inter-Ministerial committee set up by government to draft the policy document was limited to representatives of the Ministry of the Interior, MEPA, Transport Malta, the Government Property Division, the Malta Tourism Authority and the Association of Hotels and Restaurants (MHRA). Representatives of the local councils were excluded from participating.

It seems that when the matter was being considered by Cabinet, the Minister for Local Councils Owen Bonnici was fast asleep as otherwise he would undoubtedly have drawn the attention of his colleagues that the Local Councils Act, in article 33, deems it a function of local councils “to advise and, where applicable, be consulted by, any authority empowered to take any decisions directly or indirectly affecting the Council and the residents it is responsible for”.

Surely the use of public open spaces by catering establishments is a matter which is of considerable interest to local councils as it affects both the councils and the residents they represent. Yet the government has a different opinion as representatives of local councils were not invited at the drawing board where the guidelines on the use of public open spaces by catering establishments were being drafted.

The guidelines introduce a one stop shop at MEPA, thereby eliminating the need to apply for around four other permits for the placing of tables and chairs in public open spaces. This would be a positive development if MEPA can take on board all the considerations which are normally an integral part of the four other application processes.

If the utilisation of public open spaces was limited to the squares in our towns and villages, I do not think that there would be any issue. There is sufficient space in such areas and using part of it for open air catering activities there would not be cause for concern.

However, problems will definitely arise in areas of mixed use, that is, areas where the ground floor is used commercially and the overlying areas are used as residences. This is a common occurrence in many of the localities where there is a high demand by the catering business for the utilisation of public open space. The guidelines, however, ignore the impacts which placing chairs and tables at street level could have on the residents in such areas, in particular those living in the floors immediately above ground level. Such impacts would primarily be the exposure of residents to secondary cigarette/tobacco smoke as well as noise and odours. The issue of noise will undoubtedly arise, in particular during siesta time, as well as late into the evenings while secondary smoke from cigarettes/tobacco as well as odours will be an ever present nuisance. Maybe if the local councils were not excluded from the inter-Ministerial Committee, these matters would have been taken into consideration.

In such instances it would be necessary to limit the placing of tables and chairs at such a distance from residences where impacts on residents from secondary smoke, noise and odours are insignificant: that is if there is sufficient space.

The guidelines establish that a passageway of 1.50 metres on pavements is to be reserved for pedestrians. In addition they establish that where a permit is requested to place chairs and tables outside third-party property, specific clearance in front of doors and windows is to be observed. Isn’t that thoughtful of the inter-Ministerial Committee? Instead of categorically excluding the placing of chairs and tables along the property of third parties it seeks to facilitate the creation of what would inevitably be a nuisance to the users of such a property. This, too, is the result of the lop-sided composition of the inter-Ministerial Committee.

Nor are parking spaces spared. The inter-Ministerial Committee makes provision in the proposed guidelines for the possibility that catering establishments can also make use of parking spaces for the placing of tables and chairs when other space is insufficient. The guidelines leave no stone unturned in ensuring that tables and chairs get priority, even though this is worded in terms that make it appear that it would be an exception.

Enforcement, as usual, will be another headache. We already have quite a number of cases in various localities where passageways are minimal or inexistent and pedestrians, excluded from walking along the pavement have to move along with the traffic, right in the middle of the road. At times this may prove quite difficult and dangerous, in particular for wheelchair users or in the case of parents with small children. Enforcement to date is practically inexistent and I do not think that matters will change much in this respect.

Unfortunately, MEPA is a repeat offender in ignoring the interests of the residential community when faced with all types of development. The guidelines on the use of public open space by catering establishments are thus more of the same.

While cars have taken over our roads, catering establishments will now be guided on how to take over our pavements and open spaces, parking included!

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday – 13 September 2015  

Il-bankina m’għadhiex tagħna lkoll : saret tagħhom biss

1.50 metres distance

Illum ġie ippubblikat għal konsultazzjoni pubblika dokument dwar il-kriterji li fuqhom jiġu ikkunsidrati permessi għal siġġijiet u mwejjed f’postijiet pubbliċi.

Ħlief għall-one-stop-shop, fis-sustanza ma hemm xejn ġdid fid-dokument għax diġà anke fil-preżent suppost li min għandu permess simili għandu ukoll l-obbligu li jħalli 1.50 metri passaġġ minn fejn jgħaddu n-nies.

Issa kieku jitħallew dan il-metru u nofs il-ħajja tkun iktar faċli għal kulħadd. Imma fil-fatt f’numru ta’ każi ma jitħallewx.

Mur fejn trid f’Malta u Għawdex u għandek issib numru mhux żgħir ta’ każi fejn jekk tipprova tgħaddi mill-ftit spazju li jħallu fuq il-bankina, jħarsulek bl-ikrah. Il-Belt, Tas-Sliema, in-Naxxar u San Pawl il-Baħar issib eżempji kemm trid. Bil-kemm tgħaddi bil-mixi aħseb u ara jekk tkun b’xi siġġu tar-roti inkella b’xi tarbija (fl-idejn jew fil-pram).

Fid-dokument ta’ konsultazzjoni jingħad li jkunu ikkunsidrati applikazzjonijiet għall-permessi fil-pjazez u bankini bil-kundizzjoni tal-1.50 metri li għandhom jitħallew passaġġ. Imma meta tibda taqra tibda issib numru ta’ eċċezzjonijiet.

Per eżempju, fid-dokument jingħad li f’xi każijiet, jista’ jkun ikkunsrat li l-permess ma jkunx biss biex jitqegħdu imwejjed fuq il-bankina, imma jistgħu jkunu ikkunsidrati l-ispazji tal-parking ukoll!

Id-dokument fih ħafna logħob bil-kliem, bħall-ħafna dokumenti oħra konnessi mal-ippjanar għall-użu tal-art.

Id-dokument jgħid li d-drittijiet ta’ terzi [third party rights] għandhom ikunu imħarsa meta jinħargu dawn il-permessi. Din hi daħqa oħra għax nafu kemm fil-prattika jiġu mħarsa dawn id-drittijiet mill-awtoritajiet pubbliċi f’Malta.

L-eżerċizzju biex inħareġ dan id-dokument ta’ konsultazzjoni sar bil-koordinazzjoni ta’ Kumitat li kien fih parteċipazzjoni wiesa’ : kien hemm bosta minbarra dawk li huma l-iktar viċin in-nies: ma kien hemm ħadd mill-Kunsilli Lokali. Fil-fatt kien hemm rappreżentanti tal-Ministeru tal-Intern, tal-MEPA, ta’ Transport Malta, tad-Diviżjoni tal-Propjetà tal-Gvern u tal-Awtorità tat-Turiżmu, u l-Assoċjazzjoni tar-Restoranti u l-Lukandi (MHRA).

Il-Kunsilli Lokali u r-residenti ma kienux meqjusa ta’ importanza biex jipparteċipaw f’dan l-eżerċiżżju, bħal dak li qallu li l-bankini, t-toroq, il-parking spaces, u pjażez li ser jieħdu (jew ħadu diga) mhux ir-residenti jagħmlu użu minnhom s’issa. Issa s-siġġijiet u l-imwejjed ser jibdew jingħataw prijorità.

Il-permessi ser jibdew jinħarġu mill-MEPA. Ser jinħareġ bis-sistema ta’ one-stop-shop. Jiġifieri applikazzjoni waħda biss li ma tieħux ħafna żmien biex tkun deċiża. Din hi sistema li tiffavorixxi lin-negozji u dejjem taħdem kontra r-residenti. Għax biex permess joħrog malajr ifisser li ftit li xejn ikun hemm ċans li min ikun effettwat bih isir jaf (jew ikun infurmat).

Insomma nistgħu ngħidu li dan m’hu xejn ġdid. Il-bankina issa m’għadiex tagħna lkoll, ser tkun tagħhom biss.

Id-destinazzjoni tal-Opposizzjoni

Dak li għaddej fil-Parlament bħalissa hu serju ħafna.

L-ewwelnett hu serju fih innifsu li l-Parlament jiddiskuti mozzjoni ta’ ċensura f’Ministru. Hemm bżonn li jkun hemm iktar okkazjonijiet fejn Membri tal-Parlament li jkollhom il-fehma li Ministru jew ieħor naqas iġibu l-materja għad-diskussjoni.

Imma dak li qed jiġri issa fil-Parlament m’huwiex biex jiġi diskuss l-operat ta’ Ministru li naqas jew ta’  Ministeru li ma ħadimx.  L-affarijiet illum fil-Ministeru tal-Intern m’humiex wisq differenti milli kienu meta kien Ministru tal-Intern Tonio Borg matul il-perjodu 1998-2008. Pjuttost huma ftit aħjar.  Imma matul dawk l-għaxar snin l-Opposizzjoni Laburista ma ressqet l-ebda mozzjoni ta’ ċensura fil-Ministru tal-Intern.

Fil-qasam tal-ambjent hemm disastru. Iżda l-ebda mozzjoni ta’ ċensura ma tressqet kontra Mario de Marco.

Fil-qasam tal-agrikoltura u s-sajd kif ukoll fil-qasam tar-Riżorsi l-affarijiet m’humiex sewwa. Iżda l-ebda mozzjoni ta’ ċensura  ma tressqet kontra Ġorġ Pullicino.

Fl-Enemalta u l-Korporazzjoni għas-Servizzi tal-Ilma l-affarijiet huma ferm il-bogħod milli jkunu sewwa. Iżda l-ebda mozzjoni  ta’ ċensura ma tressqet kontra Tonio Fenech.

L-Opposizzjoni ressqet ukoll mozzjoni ta’ ċensura kontra Richard Cachia Caruana.

Dwar Richard Cachia Caruana u Carm Mifsud Bonnici tkellem b’mod kritiku Franco Debono. Għamel dan għar-raġunijiet tiegħu li spjega fil-pubbliku. Bħalissa l-Opposizzjoni taf kif jaħsibha Franco Debono fuq dawn it-tnejn min-nies u qed tipprova tisfrutta l-opportunita li għandha quddiema. L-ambjent, l-agrikultura, is-sajd, ir-rizorsi, l-enerġija u l-ilma għandhom importanza inqas għal Franco Debono f’dan il-mument meta tqabbilhom mal-Ministeru għall-Intern jew ma  Richard Cachia Caruana.

Li qegħda tagħmel l-Opposizzjoni hi ħaġa sempliċi ħafna: sabet punt dgħajjef tal-Partit fil-Gvern u qed tattakkah fejn iweġġa’. Hi għażla politika tal-Opposizzjoni li ssib fejn il-Gvern hu l-iktar debboli u tiftaħ attakk feroċi . Ilha għaddejja b’din l-istrateġija minn Novembru meta tressqet il-mozzjoni dwar Austin Gatt li dwarha, Franco Debono wara li għamel ħafna dikjarazzjonijiet favur il-mozzjoni bidel il-ħsieb u astjena.

Jidher li l-Opposizzjoni  ser tibqa’ għaddejja b’din l-istrateġija sakemm tinfed u jkollha vot favur tagħha.  Lil min tolqot u tweġġa’ fil-proċess m’hux wisq ta’ relevanza għaliha. L-oġġettiv tal-Opposizzjoni hu l-kollass tal-Gvern. Dan il-kollass, bid-dikjarazzjonijiet ta’ Franco Debono jidher li hu possibli.

Meta l-Opposizzjoni titlob iċ-ċensura ta’ Ministru u dak il-Ministru jsib l-appoġġ ta’ sħabu kollha ifisser li l-attakk fuq il-Ministru hu ukoll attakk fuq il-Gvern kollu. Għax meta l-Gvern jagħżel li jiddefendi lill-Ministru ifisser li qed jagħtih l-appoġġ u jidentifika ruħu miegħu. Dan wara kollox hu t-tifsira tad-dutrina tar-responsabbilta kollettiva. Il-Gvern bid-difiża li qed jagħmel lil Carm Mifsud Bonnici qed jgħid bla tlaqliq li r-responsabbilta’ mhiex ta’ Carm iżda hi waħda kollettiva tal-Gvern. Għalhekk  attakk (politiku) fuq membru tal-Gvern qed jiġi ikkunsidrat li hu attakk politiku fuq il-Gvern kollu.

X’ser jiġri  nhar l-Erbgħa naħseb li ħadd m’għandu idea. L-iktar meta wieħed iqis li saru diversi dikjarazzjonijiet li imbagħad ma issarfux.

Nistennew u naraw fejn ser tasal l-Opposizzjoni.

Sadanittant il-ħin għaddej. Dak ma jistenna lil ħadd.