Ombudsman Joseph Zammit McKeon has called for transparency and accountability in the public administration of government concessions to the shipyard in Cottonera.

The complaint to the Ombudsman for an investigation was lodged by a consortium of NGOs – Azzjoni Tuna Artna Lura – and private individuals in connection with the shipyard concession granted to a group of shipyard companies, run by Palumbo.

The report states complaints were spurred by a merger “with a well-known cruise liner”. The Ombudsman did not mention MSC Cruises by name.

The Ombudsman’s Office said information about the government’s compliance and oversight obligations, including whether they had been done, should be published.

The concessions are on land/docks abutting the Grand Harbour. The Ombudsman focused on the various issues surrounding the use and management of the shipyards, which had been ongoing for years, to the detriment of the residents of the Cottonera area.

Efforts were made to address the issues with different government authorities, but failure to reach solutions led residents and NGOs to resort to the Ombudsman.

Efforts included a meeting with MIMCOL on 27 May 2020, during which the complainants raised various concerns about how the shipyards were being managed. MIMCOL responded simply that “matters were referred to the responsible authorities”.

The issues included the management of toxic waste, air and noise pollution, alleged employment law breaches, and possible breaches of other terms (particularly those pertaining to investment and maintenance of equipment) found in the concessions.

Following an analysis of the agreements, the Ombudsman noted that compliance clauses in the concession required the authorities to certify annually that the company was abiding by all its obligations and commitments as set out in the concession.

The concession also granted the government the right to demand a condition report from the company every two years.

The ministry just referred the Ombudsman to the Lands Authority with “significant delays” for the Ombudsman’s office to receive answers, which essentially amounted to different authorities pointing fingers at each other.

“Principles of public administration dictate that public assets should be managed in a clear and transparent manner to ensure proper accountability… This office cannot but observe that during its investigation, there was a distinct lack of initiative to shoulder responsibilities as set out by the concessions,” the Ombudsman noted.

He added: ” This office did, however, find evidence of regulatory silos with little coordination among entities tasked with overseeing some aspect or other of operations.”

While safeguards were put in place in the concessions themselves to ensure the government had the necessary tools to monitor operations, “proper use of the said tools remained elusive”.

“The lack of clarity as to which ministry or entity bore responsibility for the concessions also rendered accountability somewhat problematic, which in turn also caused issues for interested parties to exercise their rights to access information,” the report added.

The Ombudsman recommended carrying out an annual certification exercise, checks on condition reports and public access to any other action taken by the government.