Bill to transfer restoration centre to Heritage Malta

A Bill to transfer the functions of the Malta Centre for Restoration to Heritage Malta has started being debated in Parliament.

Tourism and Culture Minister Francis Zammit Dimech said it was important that Malta had the mechanism to protect the cultural heritage under its various aspects.

He expressed his appreciation to all those who had worked in the restoration centre, saying they had carried out important restoration works, given the country state-of-the-art equipment and having trained personnel in this speciality.

Now that these specialisations were well in train, it was felt it would be more economic and efficient if the centre was absorbed within Heritage Malta.

Dr Zammit Dimech said Malta had one of the highest concentrations of cultural heritage in the world and the Maltese had a duty to preserve it in the common interest of mankind. The government was, for this reason, raising the funding for this purpose every year.

This merger, the minister recalled, was announced in the Budget speech as a means to reduce costs. The process was started in March when the management of the centre was made identical to that of Heritage Malta, thus facilitating the merger.

Care had been taken to ensure that the work of the centre, including training, would not be interrupted by the merger.

This merger, he said, would give Heritage Malta a holistic vision on the preservation and restoration of the cultural heritage.

The minister said Heritage Malta had a track record of success. It was being proactive in its actions not just in the projects it carried out but also in the way it tapped new sources of revenue, including sponsorships by the private sector and international funding facilities.

Among its significant projects in the focus of Heritage Malta were those at Ggantija, Hagar Qim and Mnajdra where work was in hand on preservation. In this context he also wished to thank Din L-Art Helwa which had provided interpretation panels at Hagar Qim. Eventually a visitors' centre would be built here and at Ggantija.

Heritage Malta had also carried out very good work in the total revamp of the Roman Domus at Rabat.

The agency also introduced a new system for museums to be kept open during the afternoon in summer, the peak tourist season.

It was therefore right and proper that Heritage Malta was being further strengthened with the tools of research and restoration being transferred to it.

Dr Zammit Dimech said this Bill further strengthened the functions of the Superintendence of National Heritage, which was the regulator of this sector. The superintendence would be able to better promote and even carry out its own research activities. It would also keep data relative to research and restoration by other organisations and advise the government on conservation policies in consultation with Heritage Malta.

The superintendence would also be strengthened with more manpower and resources.

Heritage Malta would now have a new research and conservation unit, grouping the resources of the restoration centre. Like the centre, Heritage Malta would establish agreements with the university and other bodies for training in restoration techniques. Existing agreements entered into by the centre would be taken over by Heritage Malta.

Dr Zammit Dimech said the country had no choice but to reach for excellent standards in the preservation of the cultural heritage, because this was an investment for Malta, its people and the tourism sector.

Carmelo Abela, opposition spokesman for education and culture-underlined the importance of cultural heritage for defining Malta's identity. He also insisted that everyone had a duty to protect this heritage.

The opposition agreed with this merger. Indeed, the opposition had been complaining for years that too many quangos were being created, to the detriment of the public purse. Now time was proving the opposition right.

The Prime Minister in the Budget speech had said the government was seeking such mergers in order to reduce spending and improve efficiency. But since November only the merger of the restoration centre with Heritage Malta had been announced. Would the process launched by the Prime Minister be continued?

Mr Abela praised Heritage Malta for the work it was doing, despite having limited financial resources. He had a suspicion, however, that the government was not happy with the work of the restoration centre, which was why the process of mergers had started with it. Although a leading minister used to praise the centre and its head, it seemed that the government had now realised it was not getting value for money from the centre. Clearly, the state-of-the-art equipment at the centre was underutilised.

The centre had absorbed over Lm2 million from government and overseas funds. Some went on the new facilities but it was not clear where the rest was being used. Yet figures showed the centre consistently overspent its budget. In 2001 the Public Accounts Committee had started discussing the financial position of the centre. Several questions were raised by MPs but the replies by then chairman of the centre, Joe Cannataci were not always convincing.

This applied particularly to how salaries were decided and how payments were made to foreign workers engaged by the centre. Between 1999 and 2001 the centre's payments to foreigners climbed from Lm16,000 to Lm200,000.

Mr Abela said he also suspected that the centre could have handled a higher number of students over the years.

In his speech Mr Abela said it was unfortunate that successive governments, from both sides, had not allocated sufficient funding for cultural heritage.

It was shameful that vandalism had been committed on cultural heritage sites. He hoped that once the culprits were caught they were given the punishment which fitted the seriousness of this crime.

Mr Abela recalled that following the vandalism at Mnajdra the government issued a Cultural Heritage Strategic Plan which said that up to Lm150 million over a period of 15-20 years was needed to conserve the top cultural sites. At that time the government was spending just Lm3 million on cultural heritage, of which Lm2 million went mostly for salaries and only Lm1 million was used on capital expenditure. At that rate, Malta would need 150 years just to restore its cultural sites. In terms of the 2001 report, the government needed to allocate Lm8.5 million a year over some 17 years. Yet capital expenditure this year alone would only reach some Lm600,000, which was Lm200,000 less than last year.

What had become of the promised fund for tourism and culture?

Mr Abela stressed that the cultural heritage needed to be preserved not just for reasons of national identity but also because it should be a central element of Malta's tourism package.

Unfortunately, he felt that not enough emphasis on Malta's rich cultural heritage was made in tourism promotion.

Having said that, though, there was also need for more Maltese to visit cultural sites. Between January and July this year, 11,800 students visited cultural sites. This was not a large enough number, although progress had been made, he concluded.

Other speakers will be reported tomorrow.