Reference is made to the article “San Gwann council changes waste collection strategy” (TMIS, 7 February).

After giving this new strategy a fair trial, the Kappara Residents’ Voluntary Action Group (KRVAG) is convinced that the residents of Kappara are not being adequately served, as is being claimed by Mayor Joseph Agius. Since the new arrangements were introduced, the KRVAG has been receiving numerous complaints from Kappara residents, who in their majority are of the opinion that the previous arrangements worked much better. This is an excellent illustration of the wisdom of the adage “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

Representatives of Green MT Limited, an independent waste management services company, have also been visiting Kappara residents door to door, asking if they are satisfied with the new arrangements, and they too have received a vast number of complaints.

Let us start with the refuse collection time. This has been changed from around 1.30 in the afternoon to as early as 7.30 in the morning. The previous collection time of around 1.30 was a much more suitable time for Kappara residents, who are mostly elderly people and who therefore are not always able to take their rubbish out so early in the morning. In fact, some have now even had to resort to putting their rubbish out the night before, with all the consequences that this causes with cats tearing the bags in search food, not to mention the possibility of attracting rats, thus creating a major health concern.

Another problem is the fact that no general refuse collection is taking place on Tuesdays and Thursdays, as these two days are reserved for the collection of recyclable waste. What Kappara residents want to know is: why are two days a week reserved for this collection? Surely one day a week is adequate for this type of collection, as in fact is done by most other local councils. People who have put out recyclable refuse on a Tuesday are hardly likely to have much similar refuse by Thursday; therefore the second collection of recyclable material in the week is superfluous, and would be better converted back to collecting general refuse. After all, there are in place several bring-in sites for recyclable waste, making any collection of recyclable waste at all surplus to requirements.

We also wish to point out that as a result of the Council’s illogical idea to have two collections of recyclable material per week, i.e. on Tuesdays and Thursdays, this week Kappara residents have had to hang on to their other household refuse for a total of four whole days, i.e. from Monday 8th February to Friday 12th February. This is due to the fact that Wednesday 10th February was a public holiday, and therefore no collection was made. Having taken a good look around San Gwann and Kappara recently, the Kappara Residents’ Voluntary Action Group must congratulate the local council on its achievement, that of making the whole area look like a rubbish dump. This is what the mayor considers as good service. It may be cheaper, but good service it certainly is not.

We now come to the skips in Kappara, or should we say the lack of them. These have been reduced from 185 to just 50 in the whole of San Gwann, including Kappara and Mensija, that is to say a reduction of 73 per cent. The reason given by the mayor that too many people from outside the locality were dumping their rubbish in these skips is not a valid reason to reduce the number of skips. This is like saying that in order to cure the disease, we kill the patient. Again we ask: why? If the general refuse collection service has been reduced, surely it makes no sense whatsoever to drastically reduce the number of skips at the same time? With Kappara residents often missing the new, early collection time, they are now relying on the skips even more to cater for their needs. However, they often find that the few skips that are left are already full to overflowing, with garbage scattered all over the ground. In fact, just within one short hour after the skips are emptied, they are already full to overflowing again, and are then left like that, getting worse and worse throughout the day, until they are emptied again the following day. Furthermore, when one Kappara resident went to dispose of his household rubbish in a skip, he was told by a government instructor who was on board the scammel that he is not allowed do so!! Therefore, what are skips actually for, if not to dispose of household waste? This is the most unbelievable logic.

The refuse contractor has now also informed us that the remaining skips in Kappara are soon to disappear completely. What are Kappara residents supposed to do with their garbage once this happens? Are they to take it to the lobby of the Local Council offices? We really need to know, as they are at their wits’ end. This situation is already being experienced by the residents of Mensija, who are absolutely outraged and have contacted the KRVAG, saying that the garbage bags they leave out for collection, apart from being an eyesore, also ends up stinking of dogs’ urine.

Before the new contract was issued by the council, Kappara had both door-to-door refuse collection as well as a number of skips. Now we are being told that we can only have one or the other – not both. However, both services are complementary to one another and not exclusive to one another. Both are essential for preserving a clean environment in our locality.

The refuse contractor has also informed the KRVAG that he is fully aware of all the problems the Kappara residents have, and he has in fact reported these to the San Gwann Local Council. The response of the Local Council was “Tibzax, issa jidraw” (Don’t worry, they will get used to it). Is this the attitude residents should expect and accept from their elected councillors? After all, they should be looking after our needs.

In the light of all the above, it is amply demonstrated that Kappara residents are not being well served by the new refuse collection arrangements, and they are requesting that the previous arrangements be resumed once again. After all, the residents are much better placed to know what is suitable for them and as such, the KRVAG cannot agree that the new arrangements have improved the service, as claimed by the mayor, but have instead diminished it considerably. The refuse contractor himself can also confirm this.

The Council is putting money considerations before service to the community. However, there seemed to be enough money for the Council to buy a luxurious, corner semi-detached villa to house their offices, not to mention other projects in the pipeline, as well as social activities which are of no consequence whatsoever to Kappara residents. This money should have been more usefully employed providing services to the community, which is what councils are there for after all. They are there to serve their community, and not the other way round.

In March 2010, Kappara residents will be voting for their own administrative committee, and the Kappara Residents’ Voluntary Action Group, which is a voluntary group formed solely to look after the interests of Kappara residents, are of the opinion that the San Gwann mayor (whoever he may be) will form no part of this administrative committee. This is so that the Kappara administrative committee will have a free hand in deciding the needs of its residents, as opposed to accepting what is dictated by the San Gwann Mayor, who was quoted as saying “With the new system in place, we believe that San Gwann residents are being served well and at the same time we are spending less”, which is certainly not the case.

Josephine Mifsud

Louis Camilleri

f/obo The Kappara Residents’ Voluntary Action Group