EU states bind themselves to:
“(c) inform the Commission, prior to granting consent, of the reasons justifying the exemption granted, and provide it with the information made available, where applicable, to their own nationals.”
Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar (FAA) has looked into the waiving of EIAs ever since Malta joined the EU, and has found certain cases that give it cause for concern.
2004 cases
Most of the Government notices waive the necessity for EIAs in the case of various farms, including pig and broiler farms. It is not possible for FAA to rate the environmental threat posed by these farms without a study of each case, however the main concern is whether the farm lies within an aquifer protection zone, and how the waste water and manure will be managed, including the storage of manure under cover during the rainy months and the regulation of the spreading of manure on land. The waiving of EIAs related to farming activity could also have implications regarding the contravention of EU policies regarding the limiting of cattle herds, etc.
The last Government Notice, GN 905 above, issued in August 2004 concerns a case that was very hotly debated, as residents living in the area of the Bahar ic-Caghaq water fun park had fought tooth and nail to avoid the expansion of the water park across the road from them.
With the expansion of its surface area, the water park drew closer to the residential area and its expansion also permitted it to hold different activities, becoming a venue for loud parties and rock concerts. Its expansion has therefore turned a quiet coastal residential area into one that is busier and noisier.
This not only affects the quality of life of residents, and reduces the value of their properties significantly – as well as ruining the views of the coast, but could also be having a negative effect on the sea animals, including dolphins, that are kept in the dolphinarium adjoining the water park.
Significantly, no mention is made of the wastewater from the different animal pools and the lack of an EIA might be contributing to its discharge directly into the sea.
2005 cases
Government Notice 335/2005 – To carry out additions to existing broiler house at Ghasri, Gozo
Government Notice 488/2005 – To erect two houses with pools at San Lawrenz, Gozo -the site is a large area Out of Development Zone.
Government Notice 581/2005 – Dumping of solid inert construction and demolition waste material and restoration of existing quarry at Kirkop, Malta – the applicant is Malta’s most powerful developer who has a history of 82 environmental infringements to his name.
Government Notice 875/2005 – Construction of a distribution centre as an extension to existing industrial concern, Mriehel
Government Notice 957/2005 – To develop and construct a perched sandy beach at Bugibba beach, l/o St. Paul’s Bay – a project that was highly criticised on the grounds of impact on natural habitat and unsustainability.
Government Notice 1076/2005 – Redevelopment of Exiles Sports Club, Sliema beach, Sliema – encroachment on a natural rocky beach.
Government Notice 628/2005 – Re-development of an existing fully licensed commercial complex, l/o Xaghra, Gozo
This project has been widely condemned as threatening an extremely beautiful landscape. The developers have used the pretext that this is a “re-development” of some abandoned buildings that already existed on the site. However, these only occupy a fraction of the site indicated.
Furthermore the site is extremely close to the scheduled nature conservation area that is a candidate for Natura 2000 status due to its unique ecology and sand dune features.
Until some time ago, turtles used to nest on this beautiful sandy beach. The building of such a large commercial project would commercialise the bay, which is, up to now, almost unspoilt, and destroy any hope of preserving dark skies parameters.
The bay also boasts Roman remains. The construction of a large tourist project would forever destroy this unique area, the most beautiful beach in both Malta and Gozo.
2006 cases
Government Notice 249/2005 – Excavation and construction of service gallery from Wied Ghollieqa Street, Kappara to Ortolan Street, Swieqi.
Government Notice 415/2005 – To sanction alterations and additions to a pig farm approved in PA 7435/96. Also modifications to landscaping scheme.
Government Notice 528/2005 – Replacement of underground fuel tank
Government Notice 851/2005 – Splash and Fun Water Park, Bahar ic-Caghaq. Additional recreational facilities, including water slides – this is the second expansion for which an EIA has been waived for this establishment, the earlier application being GN 905/2004.
2007 cases
Government Notice 0029/2005 – To demolish existing boundary walls and pump room and erect a broiler house – il-Qasam, Kercem, Gozo.
Government Notice 0130/2005 – Construction of broiler unit, manure clamp and cesspit – Maghtab.
Government Notice 0151/2005 – Demolition of existing hotel, restoration of Cambridge Battery, construction of six apartment blocks containing 386 flats, four levels of underground parking, private service amenities for residents, change of use from barracks to offices – in addition to the issues the FAA has already raised for the holding of an EI, a geologist has brought to its attention the fact that, as the area is honeycombed with sea-caves, a thorough geological study as part of an EIA needs to be made in order to ensure stability of the foundations, especially in view of the depth of excavation required by four levels of underground parking.
In addition to the above comments on specific cases, the waiving of EIAs also raises two questions:
1. Cases where the need for an EIA is waived at the screening stage, where there are serious grounds for one. Such cases would not therefore be highlighted by the issuing of a Government Notice justifying the waiving. A case in point was the Qui si-Sana car-park, where the Auditor’s Report concluded:
“The Audit Office has to express its concern at the way crucial decisions are taken and not properly recorded. The preamble to Schedule 1, Section 4 of the Section entitled Development on the Coast and Offshore includes “activities which rely on land-sea interaction”. The Audit Office notes that the popularity of Qui-si-Sana promenade depends on the close proximity of the seashore. It will not presume to declare that the fact constitutes a “land-sea interaction” in terms of the provision of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations, but at least it would have expected that Mepa would clearly state why it does not.
The Audit Office notes that “If the development was such that it required some form of Environmental Impact Assessment, an exemption could have been granted in terms of Regulation 3(8). However, if such an option is selected, a detailed justification as to why a limited Environmental Impact Assessment was not requested shall be provided and shall be made public.”
The screening process is a very critical phase of adjudication and the wording of our EIA regulations renders them subject to arbitrary interpretation. This is an issue of great concern to the FAA.
2. Issues of competitivity and the raising of the thresholds in the new EIA regulations. The Environment Ministry’s justification for proposing new EIA regulations is the fact that the present EIAs negatively affect farmers’ competitivity. It is felt, however, that it is property developers’ competitivity that is, in fact, being safeguarded. It is thought that the authorities are hoping that even if raised, our thresholds will remain low enough by European standards for the rises to go unnoticed. In fact, the thresholds are already high for the dimensions of our tiny island, and raising them further will be tantamount to having no EIA regulations at all, as they will permit almost all projects to pass without the requirement for an EIA.
The FAA has been told that this would be viewed very seriously by other competing EU countries, and our determination to protect developers’ rights could have the effect of dampening bilateral relations with other member states.
It is of the utmost importance that the EU Delegation raises this matter in talks with our Government, especially in terms of the waiving of the EIA.