Workers in the community

Michael Briguglio

Times of Malta 12 September 2016

“For the first time in history, the unemployment rate in Malta dropped to under four per cent”. This triumphant statement was made by the Department of Information last month. Technically speaking, the statement is correct. At 3.9 per cent, Malta’s unemployment rate also happens to be the lowest in the European Union.

Just as the government was busy promoting this achievement, the Times of Malta published some facts that shed further light on the matter.

Basically, it transpired that the newly-launched Community Work Scheme Enterprise Foundation absorbed 567 long-term unemployed individuals from the 4,033 registered unemployed, thus resulting in a downward revision of Malta’s official unemployment rate.

This move was carried out by the Jobs Plus agency (the former Employment and Training Corporation) and these people are now being paid the minimum wage, courtesy of the taxpayer.

They are full-time employees - “so far, for five years” - with the public service in a scheme run by the General Workers’ Union. They are said to perform tasks with local councils, carry out maintenance work at schools and other public entities and assist NGOs.

The Ministry for Education and Employment has hailed this initiative as one which provides “experience and skill-building rather than fixed employment, while individuals are helped in the process of finding work in the private sector”.

Is this initiative justified or not?

The Community Work Scheme requires visibility, transparency, accountability and auditing

I think there are different ways at looking at this issue and these are not necessarily exclusive of each other.

One interpretation would welcome this initiative as one that gives dignity to people who were otherwise unemployable and who are now being productive instead of welfare dependent.

This would be in synch with the social policy perspective known as welfare-to-work. Here, people are incentivised towards employment. Other schemes along these lines include the tapering of benefits for persons who enter employment, the provision of universal childcare facilities for working parents and investment in training for unemployed workers.

This interpretation is being put forward by the government but can easily be supported by those – myself included - who believe in a progressive social policy that aims to empower people.

Yet, another interpretation would suggest investigating what is actually being carried out by these workers. Are they really being productive and is their work being audited?

In this regard, some local councils have complained that workers are giving less output than what is expected from full-timers. This is quite common in similar schemes, which have been in place under different administrations.

Whether such workers are productive or not depends on various factors, ranging from their attitude to the type of jobs they are being assigned.

Local councils rely on goodwill and the power of persuasion because ultimate authority over such workers lies elsewhere.

A more cynical interpretation of such schemes would enquire whether the jobs and conditions given to the workers are in any way related to constituency requirements of respective ministers and other politicians in government.

And, sometimes, ministers might feel jealous when rising star candidates from local councils are performing well, especially if they are deemed to be competitors in general elections.

Finally, another interpretation of this initiative would be that the government is carrying out an exercise of creative accounting, which conveniently lowers the official unemployment rate.

This interpretation has its strengths but one should also keep in mind that Malta’s private sector keeps creating thousands of new jobs, to the benefit of Malta’s economy. Yet, paradoxically, there are also many workers who are experiencing increased hardships due to low wages.

In my view, the Community Work Scheme is in itself a good idea. But it requires visibility, transparency, accountability and auditing, especially since it is financed through public expenditure. Entities using the service of its workers should also have a greater say in its operations and implementation.

Skyscrapers - Stop the Greed Campaign - Do your part

Environmental NGO Din l-Art Helwa will be appealing against the decisions by the Planning Authority to grant permission to the highrise development projects at Townsquare, Sliema and Mriehel respectively.

You can do your part by giving a donation to Din l-Art Helwa. 

Din l-Art Helwa is seeking to raise at least €8,000 to cover costs related to the appeal process and other legal steps to challenge the decisions that are to alter Malta forever. All expenses will be accounted for.

For more information, and to give a donation, click here .

Construction malpractices

Lino Briguglio

Times of Malta 30 July 2016

Reference is made to the video carried online in the Times of Malta of July 19, showing a truck being driven in Attard and leaving behind a cloud of dust. This is just one of the many common malpractices of building contractors and their workers in Malta and Gozo.

Many contractors blatantly disregard the law by blocking pavements, occupy parking spaces without proper permits, fail to use vacuuming tools and as a result unnecessarily emit dust from the building site, do not clean the tyres of their vehicles before these exit the site, thus dirtying nearby streets... the list is endless.

Often adherence to the law is tongue-in-cheek and cynical, as is the case when used and re-used ragged pieces of green material cover building sites, supposedly to contain emissions of dust, or when loads of building debris carried on construction trucks are covered with old flimsy rags.

The Facebook community, which I administer, titled ‘Against Building Regulations Abuse’ (acronym ABRA) often carries pictures, sent by members of this community, of malpractices and sub-standard construction site management. Apart from the abuses mentioned above, these pictures show dangerous excavations, use of old rusty scaffolding with protruding edges, and use of concrete wire mesh, often left untrimmed, preciously fitted to cover excavated ground.

Health and safety practices on building sites are abysmal, and many deaths and accidents suffered by construction workers could be avoided

Members of the ABRA community often complain about excessive noise on building sites, and about the commencement of work very early in the morning, against the regulations.

A frequent occurrence near building sites, pictures of which are also carried on the ABRA site, is the use of bricks or stone slabs as no-parking signs.

Often these bricks or stone slabs are left lying on the pavements ready to be used again whenever the contractor or his workers want to occupy parking spaces.

Apart from the uglifying impact of badly managed building sites and discomfort caused to nearby residents, there are also problems relating to health and safety. One often hears of accidents on building sites, at times the result of bad management and disregard of safety regulations.

Health and safety practices on building sites in Malta and Gozo are abysmal, and many deaths and accidents suffered by construction workers could be avoidedif contractors do not penny pinch on safety measures.

It is difficult to understand why on a construction worth many thousands of euros, if not millions, contractors often use scrap materials, totally disregarding their uglifying effects.

One often sees leftover pieces of wood or rusty iron mesh used instead of temporary doors, important building-site notices shoddily fixed to the wall with left-over pieces of wood, and ad hoc notices roughly painted on pieces of old cardboard.

The old polluting vehicles used by many contractors, many of which should be scrapped, the unsightly hoardings and use of scrap materials and the flimsy cover on transported building debris, also serve as evidence of the scrimping habits of many contractors.

This culture of malpractices on building sites obviously needs to be controlled.

There are three major negative effects, namely uglification of the neighbourhood, discomfort to residents living nearby mostly through air and noise pollution, and safety risks to the workers and to passers-by.

Unfortunately, during these last three years, with the rapid growth of the construction industry, enforcement against building abuse and malpractices seems to be weakening and atrocious and disgraceful building site practices seem to be increasing as a result.

All this calls for stronger and stricter enforcement and harsher penalties aimed at controlling abuse and malpractices on building sites. The current enforcement arrangements are largely ineffective, as can be seen from the frequent occurrence of shoddy and sub-standard site management.

Regulatory bodies such as the Building Regulations Office and the Health and Safety Authorities should be properly manned - the human resources available to these bodies do not seem to be enough to oversee the hundreds of building sites spread over Malta and Gozo.

These inspectors should visit sites frequently, from the very start of the project, and on a routine basis thereafter, and not (mostly) in response to calls by exasperated residents. Also, inspectors should have police support when the contractors blatantly disregard the regulations.

The government should, through an appropriate agency, draw up, publish and publicise a manual of good practice on building sites, which contractors would be expected to abide with.

This manual should complement the Environmental Management Construction Site Regulations (L.N. 295 of 2007), and would go into more detail as to how the building site should be managed.

It should include guidelines as to how contractors should provide information to nearby residents well in advance to the commencement of the construction, the likely date of completion of the building and methods of fostering good relations between the contractor/s and the residents living near the buidling sites.

Licences for contractors should then be contingent on the applicants’ knowledge of the rules of good practice as explained in the manual.

Lino Briguglio writes on behalf of 20 others.

Lino Briguglio is professor of economics and director, Islands and Small States Institute.

Facebook page: Against Building Regulations Abuse - click here

Townsquare project: Where do Sliema’s elected MPs stand?

Tim Diacono
Malta Today 1 September 2016

Debate on the Townsquare tower at Qui Si Sana has raged on since its approval by the Planning Authority earlier this month, with the Sliema council, residents, environmental NGOs, and student organisations all vociferous in their criticism of it. Yet, the MPs who have been elected on the tenth district to represent residents of Sliema, Gzira, St Julian’s and Pembroke have so far been conspicuous by their absence from the public debate. 

As such, MaltaToday sought to discover the personal opinion of the seven MPs on the 38-storey tower, that will be developed by the Gasan Group. The three Nationalist MPs who spoke to this paper all said that their personal views identically reflect those espoused by fellow MP Ryan Callus who, as the Opposition’s representative on the Planning Authority board, had voted against the project. 

The harshest criticism came from Robert Arrigo, who claimed that the project “reeked of pre-election deals”. 

“The change in government got the change that some developers wanted, and not what switchers wanted,” he told MaltaToday. “The Nationalist Party in Opposition stood tall and voted against it. Voting for change has never been translated so harshly. 

“My opinion is that this project is out of place, without a real and proper master plan involving all entities. The PA hearing scene could have come out straight from a film, nicely rehearsed, well-executed, where the Environment and Resources Authority chairman [Victor Axiak] was absent without a representative, and another individual [PA board member Timmy Gambin] not divulging an important memo which could have shifted the final vote.

“This permit opens all the doors for others to apply, anywhere, for high-rise projects. With this vote, the logic we know, was thrown out of the window.”

Opposition MP Francis Zammit Dimech warned that the project would be detrimental to Sliema residents and to the surrounding environment.

He was also open to the possibility that a future PN government could seek to find legal means to halt the project in its tracks for the benefit of residents. 

“It will all depend on what stage the development would have reached, and it is ultimately not in my remit,” he said. “However, my opinion is that if the project can be legally stopped then it should be, for the sake of the quality of life of residents, as well as of the environment.” 

MP and former environment minister George Pullicino said that he is fully behind the PN’s policy against the project. 

“The PN’s policy on the matter is very clear. Ryan Callus didn’t just vote against the project, but gave concrete reasons as to why he did so, largely related to the lack of impact studies. My personal position is exactly the same as his.” 

Also, Karl Gouder – who was sworn as an MP earlier this year to replace Albert Fenech – said that the PN is still hopeful that the Prime Minister listens to the pleas of Sliema residents against the project.

“The PN could never be in favour of a project like Townsquare that will leave a huge impact on Sliema residents,” he said.

“The PN, including myself and other colleagues from the 10th district, worked closely with the Sliema local council both before the hearing, and after it, and the Sliema local council will in the coming days lodge a formal appeal to the project.”

‘Townsquare shows need to tighten property development laws’ – Bartolo 

Education minister Evarist Bartolo has focused his criticism on the procedure that led up to the PA’s decision to approve the Townsquare project. 

In an opinion piece for MaltaToday, he questioned how Gasan was able to get away with merely acknowledging that noise pollution and increases in vehicle emissions would be a “major” concern in its impact assessment, without offering ways to mitigate them.

“The process is being done and the law is being followed, but the analytical depth of the established process leaves a lot to be desired,” he wrote. “In theory, going up and not sideways makes plenty of sense. The strategy is definitely sound. However, in my view, the tactics need to be improved on different fronts: holistically, at procedural level, and ultimately through implementation. This is very much a political matter – laws need to change to make sure that regulation and safeguards are improved.

“The fixation on a particular project will come and go, but real progress and change will only happen once we address the structural issues of the regulatory and policy framework in property development.”

Labour MP Michael Falzon, on the other hand, refused to divulge his personal opinion on the controversial project. 

“Planning policies and legal procedures must be adhered to, including for Townsquare, which is a project like all others,” the former parliamentary secretary for planning told MaltaToday. “However, I will not give my personal opinion on the project itself.”

Competitiveness minister Manuel Mallia was not available for comment by the time of writing. 

Sliema’s MPs and Townsquare

Lino Briguglio, Professor of Economics, Director, Islands and Small States Institute, 

University of Malta

Times of Malta - Sunday 28 August 2016 

The following MPs received the highest number of votes on the 10th electoral district (which includes Sliema) at the 2013 general elections: George Pullicino, Robert Arrigo and Francis Zammit Dimech for the Nationalist Party, and Manwel Mallia, Michael Falzon and Evarist Bartolo for the Labour Party.

Given the support they received from the Sliema people, one expects that these MPs stand up for the interests of their constituents. I am sure they are aware that the Sliema people are extremely worried about the proposed Townsquare high-rise building.

There are a number of reasons for this concern, including the extreme inconvenience that will be caused to residents, over many years, during the excavation and construction phase; the uglification of the Sliema skyline; the increase in traffic that will be generated in a highly congested area; and the heavy shadows the tower will cast on the Qui-si-Sana coastal area.

I wish to ask these honourable gentlemen whether they are in favour of such a development, and if not, may I take the liberty to suggest that they should express their views on this matter, primarily in Parliament, and also in the newspapers and the social media.

Sliema council's Townsquare appeal to focus on PA's 'flawed procedures'

Philip Leone Ganado - Times of Malta, 19 August 2016

The Sliema local council’s appeal against the controversial Townsquare development will be based on “flawed procedures” and the failure of the Planning Authority to adhere to legal requirements.

In a meeting on Wednesday, the council unanimously agreed to appeal the PA’s decision to grant a permit for the 38-storey development, which has been vociferously opposed by residents and environmental groups.

The council is made up of seven Nationalist Party representatives, three from the Labour Party and one representing Alternattiva Demokratika.

AD councillor Michael Briguglio, who spearheaded the call for the council to appeal, told the Times of Malta: “The appeal is purely a legal matter. We will focus on areas where, according to our legal advice, the PA did not conform with the law and did not follow procedure.”

Appeals against the decision can be filed up to 30 days after the decision notice is published in the Government Gazette, which is expected by the end of August.

The council is currently meeting its lawyers to formulate the grounds for the appeal. Discussions are also ongoing with heritage NGO Din L-Art Ħelwa over the possibility of a joint appeal.

The Townsquare project, proposed by the Gasan Group, was narrowly approved by the PA board earlier this month by seven votes to six, a few hours after the approval of an equally controversial development of four interlinked high-rise buildings in Mrieħel.

Environmental organisations have said they would continue to seek all legal avenues to halt the “tidal wave of towers”.

It is still not known whether the Environment and Resources Authority (ERA) will submit an appeal, as it is empowered to do by law following the split from the PA.

The authority initially said it “did not envisage appealing” days after the decision was taken, but it since appears to have backed down from that stance, with chairman Victor Axiak stating this week that he would be meeting with lawyers and experts before coming to a decision.

The Sunday Times of Malta reported that Prof. Axiak had expressed reservations about the controversial high-rise project in a memo to fellow PA board member Timmy Gambin. The memo, which was not referenced or read out during the hearing on the Townsquare project, had described the environmental impact assessment for the project as a “sham”.

Prof. Axiak was absent from the PA board meeting due to illness, leaving the ERA with no real say or vote during proceedings.

Where is the consultation?

Michael Briguglio
Times of Malta 22 August 2016

Some old Labour nostalgics argue that Joseph Muscat is very different from Dom Mintoff. Their narrative states that Mintoff looked to the political left while Muscat looks to the right. Mintoff gave primacy to social justice, Muscat is in the pockets of big business. And so forth.

I think that things are not so clear-cut. Yes, there are differences between Mintoff’s and Muscat’s respective Labour parties. For example, Muscat has opened up to various middle-class concerns. Gone are the days of the glorification of boiler suits and workerist relics. Though one can also argue that it was Mintoff’s Labour government that constructed the middle class in the first place.

Yet, to say that Mintoff’s Labour had no relationship with big business is far beyond the truth. This narrative is so typical of socialist mythology of some golden age of socialism, which, in reality, never existed. Society is never so simple.

The similarities between Mintoff and Muscat are prominent in their top-down leadership styles. The leader and his team are seen as the enlightened supreme decision-making body. Some members of this team might have disproportionate influence, as was the case with Lorry Sant in the 1970s and 1980s and Konrad Mizzi today.

This Mintoffian hangover is indeed present in Malta today, even though we are living in an age of multilevels of power, ranging from the global to the European, from the national to the local and from the party political to civil society.

I would like to mention some recent examples of the top-down decision-making culture under today’s Labour government.

The similarities between Dom Mintoff and Joseph Muscat are prominent in their top-down leadership styles

Due to lack of space, and for the sake of consistency, all examples involve the Transport Ministry/Transport Malta combination. These cases also involve democratically-elected local councils which, incidentally are made up of different political representations. In all cases, the government practically ignored local councils.

First: Ta’ Xbiex – Transport Malta imposed new traffic arrangements which, in many cases, led to a tight bend bang in the middle of a quiet residential area. The mayor of the locality made it clear that his local council was not involved in this traffic diversion.

Second: Mellieħa – The Transport Ministry wants to establish a floating water fun park at Golden Bay. A tender has been issued by the government and the Mellieħa local council only got to know about it after it was published. The locality’s mayor has expressed his opposition to this and has called for the commissioning of proper studies before the plan proceeds. NGOs have also raised concern on the environmental repercussions of further commercialisation of this blue-flag beach.

Third: Sliema – In the past months I had the opportunity to write about the lack of enforcement against drivers dangerously zig-zagging on the bus lane and on the parking fee situation at the public car park at the Ferries.

It would be much better if such fees are collected by the local council and used for public needs rather than by individual parkers. In both cases, the Transport Ministry acts as if local concerns are inexistent.

Sliema now has to bear the brunt of another unwise decision by the Transport Ministry/Transport Malta: the permanently orange traffic lights at the Ferries. This is confusing drivers and pedestrians alike in what has become a dangerous free-for-all situation on this busy road.

Transport Malta has been alerted to this and its official justification has to do with the Kappara road project. Fair enough but, again, why not consult with the Sliema and Gżira local councils?

Just a few days ago, a 26-year old man was hit by a car on this road and he passed away a few days later. I hope this has nothing to do with the new traffic lights arrangement.

I could go on and on with other examples in other sectors.

It is very unfortunate that subsidiarity and consultation are not being given importance by a government that was supposed to be one that listens.

Well, it might be listening to pre-electoral lobbies and to the people high up the party ladder but it really needs to pay more attention to the proposals, concerns and views of democratically-elected local councils and civil society.