NEWS | Wednesday, 14 January 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

I have nothing against the Lufthansa Technik expansion at the airport but I would like the Department of Civil Aviation (DCA) to inform the public that the height limitations in the airport zone has changed, because it is only fair that the public should know what the situation is at present.
We all know how the DCA carefully filters all MEPA applications close to the airport and how these applications are referred by MEPA to the DCA for their certification that there is no hazard to the operations of the aeroplanes at the airport. I remember a case of a client of mine who applied to MEPA to start a nursery close to Luqa airport and how the DCA objected to such development because the development would disrupt the airport safety and security.
But now I am sure that since the DCA gave its go-ahead to the development of Lufthansa Technik in the airport area, the height limitations at the airport have changed. But we do not know to what extent they have changed. Do not get me wrong – I have nothing against Lufthansa Technik and all the good work it is doing in Malta and for the Maltese. I repeat, what I am saying is that the DCA has not informed us so far as to the changes in the height limitations in the airport area.
The height limitations given to Lufthansa Technik must also affect the Control Tower as there is no existing radar to cover the new high building. I will not be surprised if the Control Tower would have to incur an additional expense and buy a new radar to cover the new development at the airport.
So far we have been kept in the dark about this too. I do not know how much such a radar costs and I cannot understand how this additional expense will have to be forked out by the Maltese taxpayers when such a necessity has arisen because of the new height limitations in the airport zone authorized by MEPA.
MEPA must also inform the public that such height limitations in the airport area have changed. It must desist now from sending applications which are not in the airport security area but outside, and which do not exceed the height limitation already given to Lufthansa, to the Department of Civil Aviation for their comments when they have already been given the green light by the DCA.
MEPA must treat the public with respect and I hope that we shall no longer see recommendations for refusal of minor applications on the grounds that the DCA is fearing that such application will hinder airport safety or security.
In Malta, unlike other countries, the Department of Civil Aviation is the regulator. The DCA forms part of the Ministry for Infrastructure, Transport and Communications and functions as a regulator of all aviation activities in Malta and ensures that such activities are carried out in compliance with those international standards which Malta has adopted as a result of its membership in organisations such as the international Civil Aviation Organisation, the European Civil Aviation Conference, Eurocontrol and the Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe.
At least this is what the DCA website says.
In other countries, the regulator and the DCA are two separate entities. In effect the regulator in these countries is the Civil Aviation Authority. In the United Kingdom the Civil Aviation Authority is an online resource providing information about its responsibilities and activities in the areas of civil aviation. As aviation regulator for the UK, the CAA ensures that UK civil aviation standards are set and adhered to. Its prime areas of responsibility are air safety, economic regulation, airspace regulation, and consumer protection. The site is organised accordingly, and each section gives comprehensive information about policy, procedures, codes of practice, regulations, and relevant legislation if applicable. Some key documents are available as PDF files.
In Malta it seems that nobody as yet has thought it fit to appoint such an authority although let us face it, many authorities in Malta many times act as a rubber stamp to the government in office, as most of the members of these authorities cherish the seat more than they cherish the office.
So it could be that such authority is considered a waste and lately we have had examples of such waste as in the case of the energy regulator when the tariffs were increased without his rubber stamp.
But going back to the subject of today’s opinion, we expect the Department of Civil Aviation to issue a press release telling us what are the new height limitations in the airport area and the airport zone are, so that we all know where we stand when it comes to MEPA applications. It is the duty of MEPA to ask for this clarification from the DCA as well.
It is thanks to the development of Lufthansa Technik that we know that the height limitations in the airport zone have increased, and not to any press release by the DCA. We have nothing against this because once it has been approved by the DCA it means that there is no hazard and it is perfectly safe to have such high buildings in the airport zone.
I expect the DCA to stop recommending refusals for developments of minor scale such as garden nurseries in the proximity of the airport as their reasons for refusal does not make sense anymore.
At the same time the Control Tower must assure us that it is well equipped to cater for the new development in the airport security zone.
We’ll wait and see!

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

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.