Attention is now focusing on the Environmental Impact Assessment process. It is absurd that, after all these years, Mepa has yet to draw up a register of consultants. Many doubt the independence of consultants under the current system and past history suggests that “he who pays the piper calls the tune”. It is in the Foundation’s best interests that the EIA for this project is not only truly independent, competent and thorough but is also seen to be so. Nothing less will do if the individuals concerned value their reputations both nationally and internationally – enough said.

There is now a very helpful description of the proposals on the Foundation’s website and an exhibition at St John’s itself. I have a few comments:

1)The covering over of the Great Siege Cemetery with Perspex is obviously designed to transform this evocative place into a “dry zone” where visitors can congregate before entering the Co-Cathedral. The large queues currently forming to enter St John’s from Republic Street will instead crowd into the cemetery to buy their tickets. Regardless of the design, this proposal is disrespectful in the extreme to those buried below this sacred precinct. This cannot be right.

2) There are no plans for sections of the underground exhibition spaces and access to them on the website. Are lift-shafts and passages to be dug under St John’s? I understand the Foundation’s original submission to Mepa showed such excavations, but the website is silent on this important issue and the Foundation’s statements on the matter seem contradictory. Information on visitor throughput, dehumidification, air-conditioning, flood control, etc., would assist everyone to comment intelligently on the proposal.

3) No estimate is provided as to how long the excavation and construction will take or how it will be carried out.

4) The tapestry gallery (as illustrated) seems to me disproportionately low and narrow for its length – a far cry from the baroque splendour these treasures were designed to grace! Is it really worth all this effort to put them in a tunnel? I think not. There must be a more sensible alternative.

Parallels have been drawn with the underground museum next to Monza’s cathedral. There is a website: . My comments are:

1) Monza’s museum is superbly designed – Italy excels in this field – but it is not as large as that contemplated for St John’s.

2) It lies below a large open space (not available at St John’s) and this permitted excavation (photographs provided) without hugely inconveniencing anyone.

3) Even so it took 10 years to complete the project.

Roger Vella Bonavita

WESTERN AUSTRALIA