No storm can justify illegal operations and illegal structures: Chamber
Malta Chamber says establishments with illegal structures should not be able to benefit from a government fund set up to help businesses damaged by Storm Harry
Updated 10.30am with ADPD reactin
Establishments with illegal structures should not be able to benefit from a government fund set up to help businesses damaged by Storm Harry, the Malta Chamber said on Wednesday.
Public money should support lawful and responsible operators, it insisted.
"Public money – taxpayers’ money which workers and ethical businesses pay – cannot and must not be used to support, fund or reward illegal business operations," the chamber said in a statement.
It was reacting to news on Tuesday that such establishments will, after all, benefit from a €1 million fund launched to compensate private property damage caused by the storm and not covered by insurance policies.
People, NGOs and businesses can claim up to €5,000 each.
Centrist party Momentum and several residents’ groups in Sliema, Valletta and Marsascala said establishments with illegal outdoor chairs and tables should be excluded from claiming compensation.
But on Tuesday, prime minister Robert Abela told Times of Malta: “If you have a minor or not-so-minor infraction, there are planning regulations for that. But when you have the livelihood of our families... we can draw a line and punish people for having an infraction, but I am not of that belief”.
Malta Chamber urges stricter eligibility criteria
The Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry said Abela's statement is "worrying".
"Supporting businesses that are in breach of planning regulations, building regulations, and conditions or contractual obligations tied to public property runs directly counter to the principles of good governance, the rule of law, and ethical public policy.
"Public funding must reward compliance, not breaches of the law."
The Chamber added it has consistently argued that those who operate legally, pay their taxes on time, and comply with planning and safety regulations must be recognised, protected, and incentivised, not placed in the same basket as those who flout the law.
"By using public funds to support businesses operating illegally, the government sends a clear message that non-compliance can be financially rewarded – this risks encouraging further disregard towards the law and instigates more flouting of planning and environmental rules.
"Businesses that invest time and resources to obtain the required permits, meet safety standards, and operate within the law are now effectively being treated on the same footing as those who do not."
This created an unlevel playing field and a clear governance anomaly, the chamber added.
A level playing field starts with respect for the law, and emergency funds must not legitimise illegality.
Extending the storm fund to businesses that are operating with illegalities contradicts this established eligibility logic and weakens public confidence in the integrity of public funding, it warned.
The Malta Chamber called on the government to exclude those businesses operating with illegalities, in line with the principle that public money should support lawful and responsible operators.
Abela chooses illegality over proper planning
For ADPD, Abela's confirmation that illegal structures will be subsidised through public funds was "deeply irresponsible and fundamentally unjust".
The party said this decision further confirmed Abela’s total disregard for the tenets of good governance and fairness.
"Abela chooses to reward years of abuse and sends a clear message that those who break planning regulations can ultimately rely on taxpayers to absorb the consequences. It is a repeat of the amnesties on planning regulation breaches dished out over the years. This time, under the guise of ‘helping’ people."
ADPD added that the environmental implications were equally alarming, as illegal construction has contributed to environmental degradation and increased vulnerability to extreme weather.
”Where are the government plans to mitigate the effects of climate change? What are the government's estimates of long-term spending necessary to mitigate these effects? Robert Abela chooses illegality instead of proper planning," ADPD's chair, Sandra Gauci, added.