The environment commission of the Archdiocese of Malta welcomed recommendations made by a pyrotechnics committee, and implied that enforcement of regulations was weak because there were those who were “powerful” or “arrogant” who protected people involved in the fireworks industry.

It started off its statement by deploring that though controls had often been mentioned in the past, the suggestions made had always been ignored, with the debate re-opening when some tragedy occurred, as had happened recently.

Religious feasts were part of the Maltese culture and should remain so, it said. Fireworks were an important part of them, but the price society was paying for the fireworks was too high so society had a right to make its voice heard.

The commission agreed that because of its nature, they could never fully control the risks in the fireworks industry, but this truth was being used by some to accept shortcomings in the production stages. The attitude was fatalistic, as if they could do nothing about it.

The commission said regulations should be enforced fully, not “as far as possible”. It was ultimately the factory licence holder who should carry the responsibility for his work, and those guilty of failings should be ferreted out before, not after some tragedy. This would translate into fines in court, rather than accidental deaths.

The Church commission said every regulation should be enforced. Weak enforcement was one of the problems which needed immediate attention. What was needed, it said, was not only continuous supervision of fireworks factories, but that the enforcers should not be left by themselves “when the moment came to take action against someone who had the protection of others who were powerful and arrogant”.

No fireworks should be allowed after the time laid down by the law, and parish priests should have more authority in this aspect. And it was not enough to have firefighting means on site as the fireworks were being let off – firemen should remain on the spot for at least three hours after the last fireworks were let off, and the service should be against payment, not at the cost of the Department of Civil Protection.

The commission said pyrotechnic recipes were the basis of the industry, and in Malta these were usually jealously guarded by those who blended them. Unfortunately the industry did not have the qualified people who could not only improve quality, but who could also improve work practices by being well informed about, and conscious of the risks.

It was important to ensure the quality of the chemicals used and as far as the commission was aware, this was not the case at present. It was crucial for the importer to guarantee the quality through documentation. As for reducing by half the potassium chlorate quota for each factory, the commission said it agreed with this. Using this chemical was full of risks, and the commission wondered whether the time had come to ban it completely, allowing only the use of potassium perchlorate, which was less sensitive.

The commission said it was not sure of the recommendation relating to the positioning of fireworks factories, but if this meant that factories which were less than 180 metres from residences should be closed down, the commission agreed with this.

As for the recommendation that fireworks factories should do their best to have an insurance policy which would protect third parties, the commission said this was not enough. Such a policy should be one of the conditions that a fireworks factory needed to fulfill.

The commission repeated recommendations which it had made about 18 months ago on the subject, in a bid to introduce more safety in the industry. On noise which fireworks generated, the commission said there had been many cases when noise levels had been exceeded seriously. Though there were regulations which controlled the size of fireworks, they also had to have controls both on the number of fireworks to be let off, as well as on the noise levels which should be permitted.