Recently there appears to have been a concerted clampdown on littering. Last month, 300 fines were handed down in the space of two weeks, for a host of contraventions ranging from discarded cigarette butts, to dumping bulky waste in public places, to leaving building sites unsecured, to being caught walking one’s dog without the necessary poop-scooping paraphernalia.
Few would argue that law enforcement is not in itself a good thing, but at the same time it is difficult not to conclude that the bulk of this enforcement action was somewhat misdirected. After all, private citizens who flick their cigarette butts from car windows, or who walk their dogs without paper bags, are fairly soft targets compared with the often rampant illegalities committed by large industry, commercial enterprises and sometimes even by government departments themselves.
A few random examples. In today’s paper we reveal how a private contractor engaged by the Water Services Corporation – a government entity – abusively deposited excavated material on a stretch of protected garigue landscape in Ghadira bay. Similar cases of indiscriminately dumped construction waste abound in other parts of the island - another example being the once-pristine Wied Ghollieqa, limits of Swieqi, where private contractors have repeatedly allowed their excess rubble to spill down into the valley below their own building sites.
This in turn creates the basis for further abusive development, on the grounds that the natural environment has in any case been destroyed.
While still in the Ghadira area, it is impossible not to comment on the irony of some 1,200 illegal boathouses in Armier: all of which were erected without a permit, but none of which shall be demolished, because the Prime Minister himself entered into a pre-electoral commitment with their owners.
From this perspective, the current clampdown can only incur the usual criticism, so often levelled at the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (among others), of being “strong with the weak and weak with the strong.”
In view of the above, how can one justify a crusade against minor contraventions, when the Prime Minister himself has given his blessing to an entirely illegal village?
Similarly, there have been very evident (and successful) attempts to encroach upon a number of popular beaches - Ghadira is again a good example - despite a law that supposedly guarantees access to the foreshore to the general public. And yet, unscrupulous private entrepreneurs have succeeded in obliterating every square inch of open space on many of Malta’s sandy beaches, littering the area with sunbeds and beach umbrellas, which they hire out at a cost. Time and again we have heard of persons verbally and even physically abused for refusing to pay for their services; but it seems the authorities are altogether too concerned with cigarette butts and dog excrement, to even notice this wilful appropriation of public land.
To be fair, there have been exceptions in this regard. Earlier this summer, the Lands Department received public support and encouragement for taking initiative against abusively installed street furniture in various parts of the island.
In Marsaskala last week (as well as Sliema and St Julian’s over preceding months) enforcement officers removed a number of illegal tables and chairs, after it transpired that their number exceeded the maximum allowed by the Malta Tourism Authority permit. This is laudable, but the Lands Department’s good intentions could well be undermined by a spectacular failure on the part of other administrative branches to similarly enforce regulations elsewhere.
For instance, this newspaper has over the past months revealed a number of irregularities associated with Malta’s immensely lucrative tuna ranching industry... including the fact that a single farm in the Comino channel increased its capacity from four cages to 21, without a valid permit to cover this extension
And yet, not only were no steps taken, but Mepa even defended the illegality: presenting the scarcely credible argument that no permit was actually required because the extra 17 tuna cages have not yet been utilised.
One can only wonder why the owner of a catering establishment in Marsaskala - whose extra tables may likewise be unused - should be treated so differently to a powerful fisheries magnate, at the helm of an industry worth millions of euros.
Evidently, certain companies and individuals continue to operate beyond the reach of the long arm of enforcement... and until this situation is rectified, it will be difficult to share the government’s optimism regarding the supposed “clampdown” on abuse.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
