The Polidano group, currently at the centre of a controversy involving the alleged illegal disposing of waste at sea, has vehemently denied media reports, as well as a Mepa press release, that the company is involved in an illegal dumping operation.

In its statement, signed by managing director Charles Polidano and general manager Jesmond Manicaro, the Polidano Group quotes from its Mepa permit to dispose of construction waste generated by the Tigne project (PA 386/01/1B/1C/17/20): “It is felt that large-scale disposal at land-based sites is inherently not advisable first of all because this would entail the loss of considerable land-based disposal site resources, but also because an exclusively land based disposal operation would impose unbearably high volumes of construction vehicle traffic through Sliema, Gzira, Ta’ Xbiex or Msida, of the order to 140 to 200 trips per day…” (emphasis added in the statement.)

The same permit also specifies that the excavated material should be disposed of at the official spoil ground located approximately two nautical miles east-northeast off Valletta.

However, due to circumstances beyond the control of the contractor (namely, the fact that the only other provider of barges on the island was reluctant to make its barges available to the Polidano Group, leaving it with no option but to procure its own barges), the company had to stockpile a limited amount of the excavated material from MIDI’s site in a specially designated area in one of its quarries at Qrendi.

The statement continues that the excavated waste was subsequently moved from the Qrendi quarry, loaded onto Polidano’s newly-acquired barges and disposed of at the official spoil ground, and not off the coast of Birzebbuga, as suggested in the media.

“The said stockpiled excavated material emanating from the MIDI project was never weighed at the Qrendi quarry and WasteServ was never billed for this material, contrary to what the media is trying to portray,” the statement said. “Furthermore, a cursory glance at the contract between Polidano and WasteServ is enough for one to realise that what the media, and Mepa for that matter, are trying to insinuate is completely unfounded.”

The Polidano statement adds that the contract is a “self regulating” one whereby the company receives a certain material in its quarries for which it invoices WasteServ. WasteServ in turn invoices those contractors who have disposed of the material in the group’s quarries. If the media allegations are correct, the statement says, the Polidano Group and WasteServ would have invoiced each other “with no gain whatsoever.”

The Polidano statement concludes with a parting shot: “The activity of disposing of material using a sea-based method is advocated by Mepa itself and is completely legitimate… or was it only legitimate when someone else’s barges were being utilised?”