There has been much debate about safety on construction sites both for workers and neighbours or third parties. The culprits are usually not the ones blamed for accidents. In one local court case where a partly newly constructed building collapsed overnight and completely destroyed a neighbouring house, the contractor blamed God for the disaster.

The much publicised effort being made at the Occupational Health and Safety Authority might be helpful but will do very little to prevent accidents on site. The problem is usually not the OHSA, the site technical officer, the perit or the engineer but the simple fact that the contractor and the workers are not skilled or trained.

This is the main cause of the accidents. Such exercises may be gaslighting the public into thinking that efforts are being made to make buildings and construction sites safe while the result could be the opposite.

The government seems to be avoiding the advice of construction experts and listening to certain rich lobby groups with vested interests such as developers and contractors. The aim seems to be to shift the blame for avoidable accidents from the unskilled, untrained cowboy contractors and placing it on the STO, the OHSA, the perit and the engineer. Most of the latter have little say on site as they are only paid agents of the developer.

Perhaps the justice minister should leave construction safety legislation to real construction experts.

In the last decade, the former BICC (Building Industry Consultative Council) put together teams of real experts with the aim of making our construction sites much safer with fewer avoidable accidents. This led to a huge effort – hundreds of hours of hard work by prominent local and overseas professionals. Having worked professionally for over a decade on important buildings in different western countries with strict building codes, I was selected to be the main coordinator of this effort.

The first discussion in this BICC forum was “why is the Maltese construction industry killing so many innocent people?” It was determined that three main reasons cause avoidable deadly accidents:

The first is that site workers need to be trained, skilled and experienced in their respective dangerous work and have a certified basic knowledge of health and safety accident prevention.

The second is that the main contractor needs to be fully trained and also possess the skills and the people skill set to be allowed to demolish, excavate or build.

The third main reason is that demolition, excavation and the building of structures need to follow mandatory pre-determined rules in the form of a national building code. This should ensure that the construction sites are safe and the building is structurally safe for its intended users.

These three challenges need to be addressed separately, with multiple complementing solutions that finally come together and work holistically towards a common goal: adoption of a Maltese building code.

To train site workers in safety and skills, the BICC first introduced the Health and Safety Card that was awarded after a short course on safety, then it implemented the Skill Card which certifies that the worker, after training and examination, has the knowledge to carry out dangerous works on site. Thousands of these cards were issued.

Unfortunately, the draft licensing legislation was watered down to a sham- Martin de Bono

To make sure contractors would be fully trained and possess the necessary skill set to do the work, the BICC proposed the Minimum Skill Requirements and the Contractor’s Licensing and Classification. Local geologists were discussing creating comprehensive geological mapping.

Unfortunately, the draft licensing legislation was watered down to a sham.

To make sure that building works are carried out safely and diligently, and that buildings are safe also after the user moves in, demolition, excavation and the building of structures should follow a national building code.

All three codes – on demolition, excavation and structure – were completed by the experts prior to the last general election when we were told to place them on hold until after the election.

At the same time, a separate group of experts concluded the safety code (access and egress code).

This is an extremely important code that together with the future fire code would ensure that people are safe in their building and would be able to exit to safety in case of emergencies. The safety code harmonised all new European Union “access for all” recommendations, together with the requirements of local entities such as the Commission for the Rights of People with Disabilities, the Planning Authority, Civil Protection Department, Malta Tourism Authority, BICC, and Building and Construction Authority, into one holistic document that rationalised conflicting requirements.

This too was placed on hold.

Another group started work on the sustainability code that incorporated the circular economy, for short, medium and long-term sustainability measures including climate change challenges. We need to be sustainable and design structures that withstand tremors, earthquakes and the new tough climate-change realities.

The national annexes or minimum building requirements also need to be defined and imposed on all projects. This is a question of minimum safety.

I would like this opportunity to thank all the free-thinking participants of this great initiative: the university lecturers, the structural engineers, the geotechnical professionals, the periti, the representatives of government entities and private stakeholders, laypersons and also the last chair of BICC who made it all possible. These extremely busy professionals took long hours out of their time to work on the building codes and it will be hard to regain their trust. 

In 2022, I had the opportunity to discuss these proposed codes and measures with some expert representatives from EU states who happened to be in Malta for an annual Eurocode meeting. I was told that these Maltese initiatives were excellent “little steps” in the right direction.

There is much to do to be on par with EU countries, including enforcing CE certification. I will be discussing these in future articles.

We need to restart work on these initiatives in order to progress steadily to the next safety level. I am convinced that the original effective proposals (not the shady, watered-down versions) that we accomplished will one day come to fruition.

Hopefully, not because of another deadly accident with more dead innocent civilians and workers, but because we have decision-makers that finally decide that in an EU state, it is the right and just thing to do.

Martin de Bono is an architect and former government adviser.