Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/722943
14 AS Environment Minister Jose Herrera will later point out, the chair I am sitting upon – at the head of the boardroom table at the very impressive Casa Leoni in Sta Venera – is 'the hottest seat in the island'. It is in this chair that Herrera takes the decisions that guide Malta's environmental policies. And with public concern about the environment currently at an all-time high, such decisions are never easy. This interview itself takes place against the backdrop of several environmental controversies. Let's start with fish farming. This week, Herrera announced the results of his ministry's investigation into the cause of the 'mysterious' thick oily slime that has polluted our beaches for years. No one was par- ticularly surprised to learn that the trail of ooze led directly to the fish farms around our shores. What was slightly surprising, however, was the sheer extent of the illegalities uncovered by the investigation. As many as half the operational tuna cages – each worth €25 million when full – are unlicensed or in breach of their permit conditions. And yet, when faced with such widespread disregard of the law, the Planning Authority's only re- sponse was to call on aquaculture operators to present a plan of ac- tion within two working days. Doesn't this hammer home the impression that the local regula- tory authorities – the PA, the Envi- ronment and Resources Authority, and (in this case) the Fisheries De- partment – are in fact powerless to enforce the law with the rich and well-connected? "Let me start by giving some background on the fish farming in- dustry," the minister begins. "Mal- ta's aquaculture industry started out in 1993. It started out small, but has since grown consider- ably. Last year, statistics show that there was more production of fish through fish farming than through direct fishing. This in itself is a good thing, because if fish farming is done in a sustainable way, it will help us preserve fish stocks…" But given what we now know: how can we talk about this indus- try as sustainable? Even without the illegalities, tuna penning is not strictly speaking 'farming' at all. The tuna are taken from the wild; they are not bred in captivity, as is the case with farmed fish… "Unfortunately, Bluefin tuna is a species which cannot be bred domestically. No one has yet suc- ceeded in producing tuna on an industrial scale through breed- ing. But I don't agree that it's not sustainable. Originally, this type of tuna penning was indeed un- sustainable, because there were no quotas. Today, the EU has set a number of quotas, and there- fore the quantity of tuna that can be taken from the wild has been limited. There has been a drive to make tuna stocks sustainable; and up to a certain extent, this EU policy has borne fruit. The Medi- terranean blue fin tuna stocks are slowly replenishing themselves – they're not back to the levels of 50 years ago, but European policies are having an effect. Tuna penning can be carried out in a sustainable way, so long as it is done according to law… But isn't that the whole point? Herrera's own investigation has established that Malta's tuna pen- ning industry is not in conformity with the law. If Malta's tuna pen- ning industry doesn't observe local laws and permit conditions… how can they be trusted to observe EU regulations? "I cannot affirm at this point in time that the investigation has proved that there is more tuna than was legally admissible. What we have managed to prove – and which is just as bad – is this: yes, there were a number of serious irregularities over a number of years, reaching a critical level late- ly. But I must also underline that the number of cages does not nec- essarily reflect the quantity of tuna they hold. When we say 'Malta is allowed to catch so much tuna', it doesn't mean they all have to be put in cages. Some of them might be slaughtered for local consump- tion. The number of cages in itself does not indicate that Malta ex- ceeded its quota…" There are however other indica- tions. Herrera's own investigation was sparked by an increase in the oily slime drifting from tuna cages towards the shore. This slime is caused by a combination of natural oils produced by the tuna them- selves, and the fish food which they are fed. Aerial photographs show large quantities of slime emanat- ing from tuna pens. This indicates that those cages are bursting with tuna… "As soon as this issue was brought to my notice – I inherited it in July – I took immediate action. I wanted to take stock of the situ- ation. I didn't have the data, so I appointed a ministerial committee involving the three regulators: the Planning Authority, the ERA and the Director General of Fisheries. The first thing I wanted to know was whether the slime was com- ing from the tuna pens. It took a couple of weeks, but we concluded that it was. Secondly, I wanted to know the extent of the infringe- ments. Here again, it resulted that there were a number of infringe- ments, including the fact that tuna pens were supposed to be relocat- ed to an area designated by the PA: six kilometres out to the southeast. It doesn't mean, however, that we are infringing EU legislation. But it does mean that we are in- fringing our own legislation. Why so much emphasis on European quotas, when the problem we are all faced with – the slime on our beaches – is caused by disregard for local laws, not European ones? Herrera acknowledges this, but adds that action has already been taken. "One of the problems was that the three regulatory authori- ties were acting in a disjointed and uncoordinated manner. The Fish- eries Department felt its duty was limited to vetting how much tuna could stay in one cage. There had to be co-ordination, which wasn't the case, to also check whether those cages were permitted by the PA. So the quantity of fish in each cage was according to law; but the number and size of the cages were not…" That was not the only failure of the regulatory authorities. The en- tire country (even from the Gozo ferry) could see that some of those farms had doubled in size. How was this glaring illegality invisible to the authorities that are sup- posed to be checking such issues? "The PA as such isn't at fault. There was a study in 2012 by Ster- ling University, which concluded that tuna penning should be done offshore; and the PA decided to transfer the pens to that zone. There was a particular company that challenged the law for admin- istrative reasons. The courts how- ever rejected their submissions, but the process was stalled…" This doesn't explain why no ir- regularities at all were ever noticed by the authorities. Doesn't this raise suspicions? Has it occurred to the minister to extend the in- vestigation to the regulators them- selves, to find out if there was cor- ruption involved? "I'm a person who hates illegali- ties. I'd like to make it clear, that if any allegation of corruption landed on my desk, I would immediately pass it on to the police… Honestly, however, I don't think the issue was corruption. I think it was a lack of co-ordination between the authorities. The PA issued a num- ber of enforcement orders. But it didn't have the whole picture. "That is something I decided to have. I wanted to take stock. This ministry was receiving criticism – justly so – and I decided I had to take action. But two things must be borne in mind. When the PA issued enforcement orders, they were appealed. Before the demerg- er, the PA unfortunately did not have the power to issue emergency enforcement. Today – and this is one of the positive things about the demerger – the PA has wide- ranging powers. In extremis, they can issue an enforcement order, so long as the Environment Author- ity states that there is an environ- mental emergency. This is this new power at their disposal, and now… I wouldn't say I 'directed', but I suggested that they should use these powers to deal with the issue…" Have they, though? Has the PA sent enforcement officers to open up the illegal cages, and re-release the illegally held tuna back into the wild? "In this case, the ERA issued a letter to the PA stating that there is an environmental emergency. Upon receiving that letter, the PA issued an emergency enforcement. Don't forget that these entities are quasi-judicial when it comes to in- dividual decisions. I can't interfere. For prudence's sake, the PA felt the need to ask the five or six tuna pen operators for a plan of action…" That takes us back to the original question. For all its discretionary powers, the PA is reluctant to take action when there are multi-mil- lion corporate interests involved… "What I can say is this. I have directed ERA to investigate ac- cording to the Environmental Protection Act, whether there are grounds to issue a letter to the At- torney General to prosecute them. So yes, action is being taken… I did give a direction to the rel- evant authorities, and they are in consultation to see whether there are grounds for these people to be prosecuted. I agree they should be prosecuted…" Meanwhile, on the subject of ministerial direction, we have re- cently seen a spate of government initiatives that call into question the present administration's envi- ronmental credentials. Examples include an amnesty to sanction ille- gal development against payment; revisions to SPED (and other laws) that permit ODZ construction in the case of 'national projects'… as well as the redevelopment of coun- tryside ruins into residences. We also saw how the MEPA demerg- er resulted in an ERA that didn't even give any input in the Sliema and Mriehel high-rise decisions. The permits were approved, even though a national master plan for high-rise has not been finalised. Is this the direction Herrera has in mind? Because it seems to point towards a lack of planning, rather than a strengthening of environ- mental protection… "These are the questions I am supposed to face, and I will face them. But I have to say, it's not Interview By Raphael Vassallo maltatoday, SUNDAY, 4 SEPTEMBER 2016 I gave a direction to the relevant authorities, and they are in consultation to see whether there are grounds for these people to be prosecuted. I agree they should be prosecuted TUNA INFRINGEMENTS Not all doom and gloo PRO-BUSINESS It is this government's policy, take it or leave it, to be pro- business. It wants to attract foreign direct investment, grow the GDP, create employment and improve the standard of living. To do this, we cannot be closed within ourselves