The president’s call for a congress on national unity has been received with scepticism from some quarters. I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss such a call out of hand.
After all, improvement in any sphere can never be attained without some form of dialogue.
But I understand that the term “national unity” cannot ever paper over the deep cracks caused by injustice or discrimination. It can never be a case of letting bygones be bygones for the sake of unity – it is no substitute for justice.
The polarisation in the country reminds me to some extent of a story told in the book Country of My Skull, Guilt, Sorrow and the Limits of Forgiveness. Antjie Krog wrote this book about the post-apartheid period on South Africa.
The country had to come to terms with its ugly past. Its people, whom the oppressive white government had pitted against one another, had to find a way to live side by side as friends and neighbours.
To begin the healing process, Nelson Mandela created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, headed by the renowned cleric Archbishop Desmond Tutu.
Krog wrote about proceedings before the commission, interspersed with short sketches such as the one about two boys, Tom and Bernard, who lived opposite each other. One day, Tom stole Bernard’s bicycle and every day Bernard saw Tom cycling to school on it. After a year, Tom went up to Bernard, stretched out his hand and said: “Let us reconcile and put the past behind us.” Bernard looked at Tom’s hand: “And what about the bicycle?” “No,” said Tom, “I’m not talking about the bicycle, I’m talking about reconciliation.”
The unfairness of such a statement is immediately apparent. There can be no reconciliation without full justice.
This week, the court continued to hear the compilation of evidence regarding the horrific incident which led to Miriam Pace’s death. The court heard how the police had received seven reports of incidents involving the same contractor working on the ill-fated Santa Venera site.
The reports related to incidents taking place between October 2008 and December 2019. Days after the tragedy, the contractor was involved in a road collapse at Pender Gardens, St Julian’s. The court also heard that the Building and Construction Agency had no blacklisting of players in the construction industry and no legal obligation to publish enforcement notices against owners of construction sites.
Any form of loose, deformalised, voluntary self-policing by the construction industry will not work- Claire Bonello
If we are to learn anything from this horrific tragedy, it is that we should take a different approach from that taken to date. What really stands out is that we need more regulation and enforcement – not less. Any form of loose, deformalised, voluntary self-policing by the construction industry will not work. Rather, it will continue to endanger the lives of third parties who will continue to be at the mercy of the industry.
An enforcement entity which is completely independent from the construction industry is a must.
This has to be coupled with a totally transparency system where third parties can have easy access to updated and timely information as to the status of the contractors working in the vicinity.
Information as to whether the contractors are applying for exemptions from the requirements of the law has to be made available to third parties who may be endangered or inconvenienced by the granting of such exemptions. Third parties must be granted the right to appeal from the granting of such exemptions. Otherwise, decisions which may affect them in a significant manner may be taken without their knowledge or participation.
This is deeply unfair. And, at some point, we should get around to publishing the names of serial offenders as a way of helping people avoid negligent and subpar contractors. Anything less will not achieve the desired result of making construction safe for all.
The government has launched five new photovoltaic (PV) schemes. The schemes are generous and truly commendable as they will be utilising clean and renewable energy. They should also help out in the savings department. I know several people who have reduced their electricity bill considerably by using a solar panel system. A couple even brought their total electricity spending down to zero.
Unfortunately, there is one outstanding obstacle to a widespread take-up of solar panel systems. That’s the fact that whoever invests in solar panels has no guarantee that the building next door won’t be demolished and turned into a multistorey building overshadowing the neighbourhood and rendering the whole solar panel completely useless. Any investment one might make in a solar-powered system becomes worthless the moment the site next door gets planning permission to be turned into a high building.
The answer to this is to enact some system of solar rights which will be enforced and implemented by the Planning Authority when considering whether to grant permits or not. It’s useless dishing out permits and then expecting people to sue for compensation in the civil courts. It defeats the whole purpose of installing clean energy systems and aiming for any level of sustainability.