Many of the opinions over the Ta’ Cenc project are based on half-truths which do not single out one positive aspect of this project

It is crystal clear that the sole aim of various articles, especially by Mr Martin Galea, which appeared in the media are obvious attempts to influence not only the general public and politicians but also the MEPA board in their decision regarding the Ta’ Cenc Project. These are being selective in orchestrated attacks based on half-truths and blatant misinformation. The fact that not once a single positive aspect of the project has been mentioned is ample proof of this: Heritage Park and Protected areas (covering approx 60% of the total area); Protection and enhancement the whole area; Creation of new job opportunities while safeguarding the present workforce (over 200 employees); Creation of much need amenities and attractions in Gozo; Free and unhindered public access.
No wonder MEPA’s spokesman had said: “It borders on the incredible how something that is easily available for public scrutiny may be allowed to be distorted beyond recognition. It seems naïve to state this but an application is assessed according to policy. The current policy application on Ta’ Cenc is TOU 10 of the Structure Plan and GZ-Snat-2 of the Gozo and Comino Local Plan. These are complementary to each other and it is therefore ludicrous to interpret the local plan as going against Structure Plan policy.” (Ta’ Cenc and the Local Plan, August 25, 2006).
The spokesman went on to quote from the local plan, which says that: “to this effect a number of submissions and studies have been undertaken in consultation with MEPA so that the provisions of this policy are implemented”.
According to reports on the same day, “... a MEPA spokesman said that the excerpt from the local plan ... shows clearly that there is no conflict between the local plan and the Structure Plan. No further comment is deemed necessary”.
The fact that in the same article it was reported that “according to Martin Galea, Din l-Art Helwa raised the issue with MEPA’s chairman last May before the plans were approved but never got a reply”, clearly proves that MEPA knew exactly what it was doing although Martin Galea dictated otherwise.
If Mr Galea, as executive president of Din l-Art Helwa, a leading and highly respected heritage trust and environmental NGO, expects his pronouncements to be given due weight – as DLH certainly deserve – he should never resort to ignoring the facts or the principles enshrined in our Constitution and trying to influence public opinion, never mind the MEPA board, through sensationalism and incorrect information or playing around with words.
Mr Galea even tries to give weight to a so-called petition on the Ta’ Cenc development. The petition carried incorrect and biased information that did not give a full picture of the whole project or its obligations when planning permission is approved. It went even further by showing photos of areas as if these are the areas to be developed. On the contrary, as Mr Galea knows very well, these form part of the proposed protected and Heritage Park areas which together will take up nearly 60 per cent of the whole area – a stretch of land larger than Valletta. Mr Galea never mentioned this fact.
For instance Mr Galea or other interested NGOs never mentioned that in 1999, over 300 bird trappers and hunters were removed from the Ta’ Cenc area, something which nobody ever did in the Maltese islands.
Neither did the petition include the fact that “the beautiful coastal area at Ta’ Cenc, the open countryside of outstanding scenic beauty” and “the vital habitat for dwindling communities of rare plants and animals” (as described in the petition itself) is not only going to be protected but also enhanced and maintained at the sole expense of Real Finanz (the owners) with the creation of Malta’s first Heritage Park. It will be freely enjoyed by everybody, free of charge, and at the same time serve as a marketing tool to be used by any operator, not just the owners, to attract more tourists to Gozo especially during the winter season when they are most needed – for walking, bird watching, educational and cultural holidays, etc.
Is Mr Galea against the Ta’ Cenc proposal especially that Ta’ Cenc will be freely enjoyed by everybody or prefers that the “outstanding scenic beauty” of the Ta’ Cenc territory be enjoyed only by the select few, that is, by the owners of the villas that exist at present? This would be the end result if the application is not approved.
How can anybody believe, that at the annual general meeting of DLH, held on February 25, Mr Galea says: “The insidious political pressure on MEPA has to stop”; “To say we have no confidence in politics meddling in development applications is an understatement. We have been there and the results are there for all to see”; “Politics has to move out of the planning process once and for all...”.
And then he goes out of his way even by not giving out the whole picture of the project to influence not just the politicians but now also the MEPA board members. Is this the way Mr Galea would like that we have an impartial democratic, systematic and transparent MEPA? Does he not believe by passing by politicians or by certain NGOs especially himself tend to undermine rather then strengthen planning issues.
It seems that certain people, especially Mr Galea, forget that we have rules to regulate planning and development and only believe that powers that be can roughshod over the MEPA’s rationale. Real Finanz have strictly followed all the set procedures and requirements as stipulated by MEPA regulations, involving all NGOs concerned and the public.
No, Mr Galea. We are not after “rampant speculation par excellence”. We only want justice to be done, and not just seen to be done. We do not expect anything else – just that our rights be fulfilled. We are asking for this not just for our sake but for the sake of anybody living in a democratic country, even more so for us Gozitans who most of the time wonder whether we are treated as second-class citizens just because we live and earn our living in Gozo.
This is why once again we went out of our way to further downscale our 2005 proposal with the end result that the total footprint of the proposed development is just 1.74% of the whole area. In so doing we are even giving up our Constitutional right of enjoyment of our private property by making sure that Ta’ Cenc will be freely accessible to everybody. No comparison to any other project ever carried out in the Maltese Islands.
Does anyone really believe that we, the Gozitan owners of Ta’ Cenc, would ever dream of doing anything to reduce in any way the natural attributes of this unique gem on our beautiful, beloved island?