Email Story
Print Story
- Alliance and Ramblers dispute stand on Ta’ Cenc
- Building Permits for the Villa near to the Xaghra Stone Circle
- Wirt Ghawdex joins in chorus of condemnation
- Damage to Xlendi Tower
- Alternattiva Demokratika Welcomes NGO’s Stand on Ta’ Cenc
- Wirt Ghawdex disturbed by MEPA’s readiness to grant permits
- Lecture on ‘The Governance of Gozo’ - Wirt Ghawdex
- Concern over repair works at Xlendi Tower
- Din l-Art Helwa wants more protection for Ta Cenc
- Ramblers Association voices concern at future MLP plans
Email Story
Print Story
The Gozitan heritage association Wirt Ghawdex has rebutted imputations made by the Ramblers Association that it was not being transparent over its position on the proposed development at Ta’ Cenc.
The Ramblers Association, which opposes any development at Ta Cenc, has criticised Wirt Ghawdex for being against certain aspects of the proposed development but pronouncing itself in favour of others such as the construction of bungalows on the right-hand side of the main pathway.
It also challenged the heritage organisation to publicly declare its aims and objectives and give more details such as the names of the signatories of the declaration on Ta’ Cenc.
However, Wirt Ghawdex said its only aim was the setting up of a heritage park in order to reverse some of the deterioration at Ta’ Cenc.
“Wirt Ghawdex has therefore only voiced approval for development in the already disturbed areas… While it is easy to condemn outright all development whatsoever, the fact remains that much of our heritage is still being lost through deterioration and inaction.
“It is therefore important to start looking for other solutions and suggestions that would assist us in finding the fine balance between the protection of our heritage and the social needs of our island.”
On the Ramblers Association’s comments on transparency, Wirt Ghawdex said: “The declaration on Ta’ Cenc was compiled following more than five hours of discussion, over two meetings, whereby all members of the society were invited to attend and give their input. A separate vote was taken on every proposed part of the development, and the results were then incorporated into our statement.”
|
|
|













