Government failed to monitor Grand Harbour shipyard concessions, Ombudsman finds
No state entity had been assigned overall responsibility for the concession, the Ombudsman said
The government failed to properly monitor two shipyard concessions granted to companies in 2010 and 2011 in the Grand Harbour, the Ombudsman said in a recent report.
The case stemmed from a complaint filed by a consortium of NGOs and residents, who had flagged a series of administrative and environmental failures over the years.
These included several large jack-up oil rigs that remained docked in the Grand Harbour long after their service contract had expired, blighting the landscape, despite complaints made to Transport Malta. The rigs were eventually removed and the berths vacated.
The NGOs also said the Environment and Planning Tribunal (EPRT) had been slow to act on complaints of toxic waste disposal, with the matter only decided in July 2023.
Most pertinent to the Ombudsman’s investigation was a complaint that MIMCOL failed to conduct bi-annual compliance reviews into noise and air pollution and “possible employment law breaches”.
Attached files
The Ombudsman found that the concession agreements placed an obligation on the government to actively monitor whether the companies were abiding by its terms and "annually certify that such obligations and commitments are being properly fulfilled and maintained".
The concession terms also gave the government the right to request a written condition report every other year.
The government had failed to properly monitor the sites, the parliamentary watchdog found, pointing to a “lack of clarity as to which entity or ministry bore responsibility for the Concessions”.
Although the concession agreements included the necessary tools to monitor the concessions, “proper use of the said tools remained elusive,” the Ombudsman said.
Following the Ombudsman’s recommendation for a single entity to take ownership of the concessions, the Lands Authority was assigned overall responsibility.
The watchdog also recommended that information about the government’s oversight of the concessions, including certification exercises and condition reports, be published.
The Ombudsman did not name the companies or describe the concession in the report.