In the last instalment of the Nadur cemetery series, the injunction issued by the farmers to stop the work was revoked by the Law Courts. And work has started again on the cemetery.

I wish to state yet again that I think the cemetery will be unsightly and it will contaminate the spring water just underneath.

Let me make the following points:

The decision taken by the local church was taken without listening to the farmers who have 100 tumoli of arable land irrigated by the spring water that is threatened by the cemetery. The farmers told me that about three months ago they went to the Gozo Curia and asked to speak to the Bishop. They were told that he had to go to a meeting at the Gozo Seminary so they went to wait for His Grace at the Seminary. But they missed him because coincidentally he left by another door.

The decision taken by the Nadur parish in choosing that site was hasty and stubborn. More graves could have been dug at the old cemetery but a store and a chapel took up the space available.

The area in front of the old cemetery under the road could have been used and the owner reputedly was ready to sell, but the Nadur parish remained stubborn in its choice to have a cemetery built in this sensitive place. The decision taken is short-sighted and similar to the one when they wanted to build a lift near the church and then make a bridge to the church to access the community radio. Much better to remove the community radio from the church and set it up somewhere else. Less money spent and no need for a lift. And yes, admitting that it was shortsighted setting up the studios on top of the church.

Will we take the Gozo Church seriously when she preaches about protecting the environment but does not lead by example? Take for instance the two statues unveiled in front of the Gozo Cathedral in defiance of MEPA, and the proposed car park near the Citadel Bastions and the Santa Marija poster issued with the prayer: “Our Lady, pray for us so that the permit for the car park is issued.” Farcical if it was not so insinuating.

Even the Nadur local council headed by the honourable Dr Said said it finds no objection. Why? Because the site was being used as a scrapyard!! Something that is not true. But maybe the council argued that since it is serving as a resting place for cars it would serve as one for human remains too!

Let me now deal with what the expert appointed by the Gozo Courts regarding the injunction to stop work on the cemetery. The so-called expert said that the water from the cemetery would not end up in the spring water because the graves will be waterproof. And that the spring water is already contaminated.

Dear expert, don't you know that there is no way you could hold the water from coming out of the cemetery? Maybe the waterproofing will hold for some years, maybe not. What then?

And how do you know that the spring water is already contaminated. The farmers know better. They drink that water and cook with it. The Eurolab test done in Italy gave the water a conductivity of 1250 ìS/cm, and 0.13g/l of nitrates. On many counts it is comparable with bottled table water and the nitrate level is not much above the EU standard (0.05g/l) for potable water, something which even Maltese tap water sometimes exceeds.

And if the cemetery is sitting on top the spring does it not make sense that the water from the cemetery will end up in the spring? I presume you or the Nadur parish will be held responsible for the damages if the water is contaminated.

And why did not MEPA, protector of the environment and MRA, protector of our resources, study this issue in depth? In its review of the injunction, the Court said that the architect who made the report for the farmers did not base his report on a hydrological and geological study. But that should have been MEPA’s responsibility, or those who are threatening this place.

Both MEPA and MRA treated the spring water issue superficially. MEPA said there was no need for an EIA, when an extension of the Addolorata Cemetery needed one and MRA said that the clay slopes in a north/north easterly direction maybe implying that the water from the cemetery site will not end up in spring water. It also required that waterproofing be done. But will this hold forever?

The Court also said that since the aquifer supplying the spring water is 25 m below the cemetery, it cannot understand how a cemetery 25 metres up, is going to affect the spring water. So the court has become an expert on aquifers too.

Don't you know dear court that according to the laws of gravity water goes down? And the Archpriest once told the farmers that MEPA refused a permit for the cemetery near the motor racetrack because it was near a government bore hole. So the water table aquifer deep down, protected by a layer of clay, may be affected by a cemetery and the perched aquifer of Ghajn Qasab is not!

I am worried about this issue because it sheds light on how decisions are taken, be it at the church, court, MEPA, MRA or local council. It means that the natural environment is in danger and few people are willing to take care of it.

Joe Portelli

NADUR