Maghtab to Mnajdra switch

One cannot but applaud Government's commitment to conform to EU policy on waste management. But then, and for similar reasons, one cannot but oppose the ill-fated and hastily drawn up proposal for the Hagar Qim interim engineered landfill for municipal solid waste.

How much thinking went into this proposal? A mere glance at the sequence of relevant events should automatically suggest the answer.

On June 2 the Cabinet resolved to identify an existing quarry or quarries that can be used as an interim landfill. The next day, Ministers Ninu Zammit and George Pullicino met and decided to set up an ad hoc committee that was to identify such a quarry and submit a written report by June 9.

It would seem that for the two ministers six calendar days is quite adequate time for the completion of such a task, submission of relative report included. After all, the Creation itself took roughly the same number of days. And that was many years ago when modern time-saving technologies had not yet been invented.

Nonetheless, the committee felt the need to explicitly comment on "the very short period of time allocated" for the submission of the required report. No wonder that more than half of the 13 pages making up the report is taken up by site maps, photographs and a blank page.

In all fairness, it must be conceded that the committee did make a sort of disclaimer as to the archaeological importance of the quarries, which since then had never featured in any government plan.

Now, it is common knowledge that it was not on that eventful day of June 2 that Cabinet first became aware of and acknowledged that the EU's legislative and regulatory framework will exercise significant influence on the development of our waste management plans.

Suffice to point out that the "Waste Policy for the Maltese Islands' was published for public consultation in 1997 and subsequently adopted in 1998 by the consultative Board for the Environment of the former Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Environment.

Then why the sudden haste verging on the panic, which is always a bad adviser or worse?

The disclaimer is being reproduced here word for word in view of its importance:

"The area near Tal-Maghlaq was designated as an Area of Archaeological Importance in 1998, after studies carried out by MEPA, due to the concentration of archaeological sites and other cultural heritage features. Among these sites are Hagar Qim and Mnajdra temples, which are Class A sites, and are also recognised by UNESCO as World Heritage Sites since 1980.

"UNESCO had identified the universal significance of these sites very early in the process of designating the status of WHS, because Malta's megalithic temples are still considered as the first free-standing structures in the world.

"Closer to the quarries are the enigmatic Misqa cisterns which are deep and very large, rock-cut cavities of unknown antiquity, and because of their monumental proportions and enigmatic origin and purpose are also scheduled as a Class A site.

"Additionally, the Maghlaq Palaeochristian tombs are also Class A sites as they are one of the earliest and best preserved examples of these sort of burial places; others may be present in the area. Therefore there is potential for further discoveries of such tombs.

"It must be pointed out that the former Planning Authority closed down the quarries of il-Maghlaq and il-Qasam il-Kbir due to the incompatibility of the operations with the natural and cultural heritage assets in the area. The development of an engineered landfill could also have a negative impact on tourism, since the archaeological sites are a tourist attraction."

The report discloses that the "views of Superintendence of Cultural Heritage on this development have not yet been sought".

In conclusion, one cannot but commend and support strategies and systems for the management of waste using the latest technologies so as to conform with the EU directive, as that is the way to improve our quality of life.

The switching off of Maghtab for an Mnajdra engineered landfill is simply not on.

It should never have been proposed. It is a sheer waste of precious time and squandering of scarce resources away from long-overdue solutions that conform to EU directives.