Each time a new policy is issued, I think to myself that the floodgates are about to be opened for illegalities to be sanctioned. In June 2016, the Labour government issued a policy on outdoor catering establishments, resulting in the Planning Authority sanctioning the taking up of parking spaces for people to have a coffee, literally, on the road.
Since that policy was approved, Sliema has seen the removal of 12 parking spaces through the permits granted to one establishment on Tower Road and four on the Strand. Many more will follow in the coming weeks. Some of the applicants do not even have a tourism licence to operate. Neither the Environment and Resources Authority nor Transport Malta evaluates these applications from a traffic or parking perspective. Owners of cafes are given rights over our public roads to remove parking spaces that are residential, and the authorities concerned do not even comment.
Representing the Sliema local council at such hearings, I point out that as a country we are still under collective shock over the tragedy of Paqpaqli. How could the PA then consent to the placing of tables on a stretch of the Strand where cars speed and people get run over regularly?
The farcical reply is that bollards will be placed surrounding the platform. There is no description of the size of the bollards. Nobody from the PA commission questions what would happen if a car crashed into the bollards or if patrons would be safe. No traffic expert or health and safety reports.
The commission thinks it is the fount of all knowledge related to such applications, and from architects they become experts in traffic, parking and health issues.
I do hope that if, God forbid, an accident should happen, the inquiring magistrate will look into the shameful, irresponsible attitude of the commission.
The Sliema local council will be appealing the permits granted.
The Times of Malta (June 13) reported the Tourism Minister saying he was “not happy seeing public land being taken over for private use”. The minister also said that “there have to be limits to everything. The private sector must be allowed to operate, while the public has the right to enjoy public land”.
How is the public enjoying public land when so many parking spaces are being removed? A bunch of lies to package a policy to place tables and chairs on public land and on our parking spaces.
Labour’s motto ‘friendly to business’ has to be urgently curtailed
Clearly our roads are not Tagħna Lkoll, and Joseph Muscat’s government is simply there to appease business interests.
Robert Vella from the PA was also in this newspaper reported to have said that “the main policy objectives were maintaining accessibility”. Isn’t parking a fundamental aspect of accessibility? How exactly are the rights of residents on Tower Road and the Strand being protected?
Some of the restaurants on the Strand had already illegally extended the public pavement before the policy was issued. In Malta, you illegally extend a pavement onto a public road, take up parking spaces and sit pretty waiting for Deborah Schembri, on behalf of the Labour government, to issue a policy where your illegality becomes legal.
It would be interesting to know who was commissioned to draft the policy. The Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association (MHRA) contributed to the inter-ministerial committee which was tasked to draft it. The government needs to publically state who the private entrepreneurs were who sat on the committee drafting this policy, as it may be the case that some of them were actual café or restaurant owners.
Both the MHRA and the Malta Developers Association publically praised Labour’s outdoor catering policy. May these two important entities now say whether the removal of public parking for people to have a coffee on busy roads is a sustainable means of implementing the policy? Is this the ‘quality product’ they advocate?
The Prime Minister has on many occasions flaunted the SPED policy. The SPED states that the lack of parking is causing a deterioration of urban areas. It also states that the creation of a demand for parking without the required supply of parking spaces is a health hazard.
During the month of October, the PA file on Sliema contained the following staggering numbers of development applications: 177 new units spread over 72 development sites, which in view of a lack of on-site parking availability will result in a shortfall of 184 parking spaces.
So in just one month, the PA has evaluated an unsustainable additional demand for 184 parking spaces, and in the same breath it is removing existing parking spaces. How exactly are such decisions in conformity with the SPED?
Sadly, the environmental provisions of the SPED are in a deep coma.
The PA and the Environment and Resources Authority are not in the least concerned that public land used for parking is being taken from residents and visitors. The PA needs to shy away from the Prime Minister’s political direction of seeking to appease the narrow interests of the few.
Labour’s motto ‘friendly to business’ has to be urgently curtailed. Parking spaces in public areas belong to the public and have to remain so.
Our urban centres will be a complete jam when this destruction is complete.
paul.radmilli@gov.mt
Paul Radmilli is a Nationalist Party local councillor for Sliema.