|
James Debono
Malta’s environment agency appears to be ignorant of the fact that the Prime Minister’s proposed golf course at Xaghra l-Hamra in Ghajn Tuffieha lies on an important, drinking water “safeguard zone”, revealed last week by this newspaper.
MaltaToday was met with silence from the Malta Environment and Planning Authority this week as questions on how it had agreed to endorse the golf course, remained unanswered.
In July, MEPA told this newspaper amongst ten reasons it listed for choosing Xaghra l-Hamra as the ideal golf site was that the “site does not lie on a drinking water safeguard zone.”
But MEPA has failed to explain how it had endorsed the government’s proposal when a Malta Resources Authority’s report, which is readily available on the internet, identified the Xaghra l-Hamra area as part of the Mizieb Sea Level drinking water safeguard zone.
MEPA had said it had also excluded the Habel Bellu site because the site lies on the aquifer protection zone.
Amidst the authority’s silence, the Ministry for Tourism has blamed MEPA for a statement made in the project description statement co-authored by consultants ADI and the Malta Tourism Authority, that the Xaghra l-Hamra area “may accommodate a golf course without affecting the aquifer protection zone.”
But the Malta Resources Authority has already sounded the alarm bell by sending comments on the project’s terms of reference requesting further studies on the impact of the golf course.
The ground water under Xaghra l-Hamra has very low levels of nitrates, chlorine and pesticides, and Malta’s seven drinking water protection areas were identified under the European Union’s Water Policy Framework Regulations.
The MRA’s reaction
The status of the Xaghra l-Hamra area as a drinking water safeguard zone will be taken in consideration when the MRA will make its final recommendations on the proposed golf course, an MRA spokesperson told MaltaToday.
The MRA has already sent its comments on the terms of reference for the environmental impact assessment of the new golf course by requesting studies on the potential impact on the groundwater in the region.
It is insisting with this newspaper it will make its final recommendations once the EIA is published by MEPA, before making any comments, but it will be taking into consideration the location of the drinking water safeguard zone.
In its December 2005 report the MRA stated “it does not recommend any new development lying within the groundwater protection zone which could potentially have a pronounced impact on the qualitative and quantitative status of the ground water resource.”
The MRA spokesperson told MaltaToday the authority must be technically satisfied the golf project will not contribute to groundwater pollution in line with legal notice LN203/2002.
Tourism blames MEPA
The Ministry for Tourism is claiming the assertion that the golf course would not affect the aquifer protection zone is listed in MEPA’s May 2005 assessment of the Xaghra l-Hamra and Tal-Qortin (Mellieha) area for golf development.
A spokesperson insisted MEPA endorsed the project description of the course in which the mistaken statement was made by ADI consultants.
ADI, who will be drawing up the EIA for the golf course, claim in their project description the Xaghra l-Hamra area “may accommodate a golf course without affecting the aquifer protection zone”.
“The EIA Regulations clearly spell out what needs to be included in the PDS,” a ministry spokesperson told MaltaToday, “and the document is not approved until MEPA is satisfied that the PDS provides and adequate picture of the type of development being proposed. MEPA approved the PDS in August 2005.”
The spokesperson confirmed this issue has been discussed in a meeting with the Malta Resources Authority. MaltaToday is informed this meeting took place after the PDS was published.
When asked by MaltaToday whether ADI had taken the area’s designation as a water protection zone in consideration, the spokesperson referred this newspaper to MEPA.
MEPA’s silence
MEPA’s reasons for choosing the Xaghra l-Hamra have contrasted sharply with the reasons it listed for turning down the Habel Bellu site, whose “agricultural importance” and “its location vis-à-vis the main tourist areas together with the risk of affecting underground water resources” were some of the reasons why this site was not recommended.
Instead, one of the advantages of Xaghra l-Hamra was that “unlike other considered sites this site is lies outside the aquifer protection zone,” MEPA has claimed.
The statements have revealed MEPA’s complete ignorance of the fact that Xaghra l-Hamra lies above a drinking water safeguard zone, when it indicated it as the best possible site for a golf course after government acquired the Hal-Far complex from Air Malta.
MEPA’s questions have so far remained unanswered as to: whether MEPA considered the fact that a part of the site coincides with the Mizieb Mean Sea Level zone drinking water safeguard zone; whether it was pointed out to the government by MEPA that the resources authority in December 2004 did not “recommend any new development lying within the groundwater protection zone”; and whether it believed to be correct the statement in ADI’s project description that a golf course at Xaghra l-Hamra would not affect the aquifer protection zone.
jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt
|
