News • 13 July 2003

Landfill plans hidden from public

The recent announcement of three new waste landfill sites when there was meant to be only one sent JULIAN MANDUCA scurrying down to WasteServ’s CEO Vince Magri’s office for a frank chat meant to be only two sent Julian Manduca scurrying to WasteServ’s CEO Vince Magri for a chat

When I walked into Vince Magri’s office Friday I expected to encounter the man alone and, not being used to interviewing someone with several onlookers, made me a bit nervous.

Vince Magri is the CEO of WasteServ Ltd a newly set up government owned company and it was clear that I was meeting more than a busy man that day.

The minister responsible for waste and resources Ninu Zammit had just announced the site for Malta’s landfill for non-inert non-hazardous waste: Ghallis. At the same time the minister also announced that Malta will have another landfill for hazardous waste and one extra landfill for non hazardous waste: both in the limits of Qrendi. That morning’s newspapers were full of angry statements disagreeing with the decisions.

The MHRA, Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, AD chairman Harry Vassallo and Friends of the Earth all expressed ire at the minister’s move.

Now here I was, looking in the eyes of two of the people who must shoulder much of the responsibility for whatever has been achieved, good or bad, in waste management. Vince Magri and WasteServ’s Head Strategy, Communications and Development, Dr Christopher Ciantar. Clearly overall responsibilities now lies with minister Ninu Zammit and perhaps more appropriately Malta’s waste management performance reflects the efforts of former minister Francis Zammit Dimech, but Magri and Ciantar were those responsible for the day to day implementation of the strategy.

During the interview it was Magri that did most of the talking and Ciantar added his comments from time to time.

WasteServ is now responsible for implementing the solid waste management strategy, although certain areas, fall under the responsibility of other ministries.

According to Malta’s waste management strategy all stakeholders should have been involved in waste management decisions, but the reaction of several in recent days would indicate they have been left in the dark.

"Whenever there was the involvement of the public, there were always reactions. During the process to decide on the sites there were several opportunities for consultation."

Not for the temporary landfills, however. "This will happen soon, when MEPA starts the public consultation process."

Since the strategy states clearly that stakeholders should be involved all through the waste management process I wonder whether the media reactions would have been less fierce had there been public consultation at an earlier stage. "I don’t believe so, the Naxxar Local council was often consulted and we even organised a study tour abroad for it. But the council is still protesting."

The Qrendi Local Council was not, however, consulted on the decisions, surely it should have been. "It is debatable. The ministry has taken a decision and there will be a public consultation process as part of an Environmental Impact Assessment."

Before the decisions were made on the landfill sites the public had access to reports which did not mention temporary landfills, and it was left unaware as to whether alternative sites were being considered.

"When we had to decide on the temporary landfill, it was clear that we needed a quarry so as to speed up the process. We examined sixteen sites that did not lie over the water table, but only two were of adequate size and were not being used."

It is debatable, in the case of national interest, whether a quarry being used should be considered, but since the public has not seen any comparative studies of the sites, it may well remain suspicious.

In the case of the decision to choose Ghallis, Ciantar and Magri said several sites were studied. "Following the Project Description Statement that identified Ghallis and Benghisa, further studies were conducted on those and other sites, but those two sites were re-confirmed by independent consultants and eventually by MEPA. It was only after further studies by the independent consultants that Ghallis was chosen."

Even these studies have not yet been made public, and it is clear that interest groups like the MHRA will remain suspicious. Magri told me "I don’t think the reports are public, we presented them to MEPA and it is up to MEPA to continue the process and involve the public."

The decision to have two temporary landfills is bound to remain controversial, the idea was not contemplated in the waste management strategy prepared by EU approved experts and adopted by the government of Malta. "The process to establish Malta’s ‘permanent’ waste landfill has taken longer than expected but we realised this would be a sensitive issue. We also realised that we will not have enough time to develop the landfill given the work involved."

It is a requirement of MEPA, Ciantar interjected, “that should Ghallis be chosen, the hardstone would have to be quarried and that will take time."

The idea that should Ghallis not have been chosen we could have avoided the temporary landfills does not sound convincing to Magri: "The only two large sites were Benghisa and Ghallis, and at Benghisa there were other problems and some rock cutting would have to happen at Benghisa too.”

With Ghallis chosen it is now clear that that site cannot be excavated in time for Malta to meet its EU commitments.“The EIA process for the ‘permanent’ landfill is expected to take up to October, and then the rock cutting would start. The timeframe is too short and the development needs to be phased."

Having two temporary landfills will mean a larger waste bill but Magri points out that: "the money will be spent over a longer time, so what we will have lost in terms of money we will gain by having landfills for a longer period of time."

Waste separation at source is meant to be introduced on a national level and WasteServ have sixty attached employees working on waste separation and treatment.

With sixty employees one wonders why so little progress has been acheived in Malta’s waste separation initiatives.

Only a few months ago it was announced that waste separation on a national level will be in place by end 2004, but already that target has been put backward.

"Waste separation cannot be fully implemented until all facilities are in place and because of the opportunity to use EU funds, these are expectd to be installed between 2004 and 2006. The EU will be providing funds for the composting plant, waste separation and other waste management facilities and it would not make sense to miss out. By 2005 we should be very advanced with our waste separation plans."

This will mean the temporary landfills will accept mixed household waste. "Mixed but not hazardous. And by 2010 we will have to decrease the volume of biodegradable waste going to landfill to 75 percent of the 1995 volume. We are on target."

Other targets will have to be met including one to reduce construction waste and another to recycle packaging waste.

"Some of the responsibility for the reduction of construction waste lies with the companies granted the tender for phase one of the waste strategy since they are obliged to meet recycling targets. The government will be able to influence the efforts by fiscal measures, but in the end it is responsibility of the building contractors and the way MEPA permits are issued."

With the charge presently at 33 cents per tonne, the likelihood of success seems slight at this time, but the companies will be subject to fines should they not manage to reach the targets, which include a 4 to 16 percent recovery target each year.

"There will be recycling of construction waste and the companies are responsible. I think the fact that no more construction waste is going to Maghtab is already a great achievement."

It remains unclear how Malta will meet the targets of the EU packaging waste directive, which stipulate that 25 percent of each type of packaging material except plastic must be recycled by 2005 and that 15 percent of all plastic is to be recycled by 2009, especially since, in the near future, soft drinks may be packaged in plastic bottles.

"We are establishing a system with the bottlers, and a number of options are being reviewed. A task force has been set up to advise government on tackling producer responsibility."

This is news to me, and when I say my goodbyes, I suggest to all that when WasteServ does something it should make it known to the public. There are signs of agreement, but the record so far has not been impressive. One can only live in hope.