'Tackle shortcomings at Mepa first, then reform'

Labour MP Evarist Bartolo warned the government on Wednesday that it was useless talking about reforming Mepa if the serious shortcomings at the authority were not tackled first. The Mepa reform bill would effectively leave Malta worse off. It was not just how much of the countryside was taken up, but also what sorts of buildings were erected in the area.

One very important aspect to consider was the area of land being taken up at Delimara for the new power station, and how much would be left for subsequent development. Mepa's immediate plans showed a need of 6,175 square metres. At a recent outline development meeting he had asked what area of land would be left for ulterior development, because it would be difficult to find another place in 10 years' time for the third phase, after the power station would have already been built.

Mr Bartolo said he had been scandalised when Mepa chairman Austin Walker had told him they were looking at this project, not at what would come later.

He queried the figure of 6,175 square metres when other Mepa documents mentioned more than 8,430 square metres because of the change of policy from gas to heavy fuel. If these latter documents were correct, it would mean that only 3,110 square metres would be left on the site, certainly not enough for the third phase.

Mr Bartolo said things had been changed around at any cost so that the tender would be awarded to BWSC. Through the Structural Plan Mepa was bound to issue a permit for the power station's extension only if the planned development had no negative impact on present or future needs of land.

It was interesting to note that another contender's alternative power station with combined cycle gas turbines, which would be cheaper and more environment-friendly, could accommodate three such plants on the same area.

A report by Enemalta in March 2008 had clearly said that two bidders were proposing combined cycle gas turbines that would fit well into the allocated land, while two other bidders, including BSWC, were offering medium-speed diesel engines taking up double the space, which would make it different to find space for continued development.

In spite of the situation having been described as delicate, the speed of the choice of BWSC made it unreasonable to install plant taking up almost 8,500 square metres in prejudice of the third phase. It constituted a serious shortcoming to believe an Enemalta official who had lightly said there would be enough space left for the third phase, even in spite of haphazardly changing answers on real requirements.

Mentioning other instances of irresponsibility concerning technology, Mr Bartolo said the energy generation plans for 2006-15 clearly said the new generation plant would have to be gas-fired in order to adhere to EU requirements. This had been declared as a government objective in 2006, but nothing had been done since and the policy had been changed back to diesel generators on heavy fuel oil.

It had been recognised that choosing diesel plant would place Malta in breach of important ceilings and liable to incur heavy penalties for infringement. What Mepa used to say had now been reversed to the contrary of Enemalta's consultations.

In future it would cost much more to do what should have been done now on the pipeline. Even a terminal instead of the pipeline would still have to be constructed. The pipeline had been on the cards since 1999, and Malta would have had supplies of natural gas by 2012, when the new plant was due to start operating.

Mr Bartolo said the foot-dragging on the pipeline had been done on purpose, as the call for tenders of 2007 had demonstrated.

At one point it had been said that even the Marsa power station would end up operating on gas. Now it would take €27 million to change the BWSC plant back to gas just a few years after the start of operations, with only half the space being needed.

Mr Bartolo said the only conclusion he could arrive at was that there was a huge lack of seriousness in what was going on. Malta, but especially Mepa, must think of the future and not just look at the present to please a few insiders.

Lack of seriousness at Mepa could also be seen in the way it worked with local councils. Taking Mellieħa as an example, the Labour-led local council up to two years ago had consistently been beset by big problems in its dealings with Mepa on proposed projects, but as soon as the council had become Nationalist-led the situation had changed completely, with the new council encountering no problems with Mepa even on applications lodged by the Labour-led council. Even projects that did not feature in the local plan for Mellieħa, including the destruction of garigue and arable land, had been approved without much ado.

Mr Bartolo asked how Mepa could lay claim to credibility if it was so partisan and its decisions were taken not truly because of the environment but according to the applicant's identity. This held true even for decisions on rationalisation, which were not really taken in the best interests of the environment.

The xagħri land at L-Ibraġ was being issued for development to compensate those who had been stopped in another area because of archaeological discoveries, irrespective of the natural heritage that was being destroyed. Talk of this by Labour had previously been described as lies.

Concluding, Mr Bartolo said Malta was in a sorry situation because previous governments' shortcomings were being used as excuses for new shortcomings. If nothing was done to stop this rot, institutions such as Mepa would continue to lose credibility.