Appreciation for destruction?

I challenge Emmanuel Bartolo Romaine (Appreciation For New Building Scheme, June 30) on the "pocket areas" he thinks are included in the shameful shift of boundaries. Real pocket areas are still at large within the scheme everywhere and surely we do not need any more of these. I challenge this gentleman to declare his independent opinion and not utter someone else's propagandistic statements. Did he look at the maps on the Mepa website?

Who told him about "the thorough period of study resulting in social justice and general well being". Was it NET TV or a party official?

I ask him to look at the maps and spot the large countryside areas. And then to explain to the readers how the development "of the same area would benefit the whole community because it will become a complete project". This is already a complete project without the need of any intervention based on "social needs".

One such area full of trees and rubble walls in front of me is owned by one wealthy owner and not by many poor families waiting for permits for individual pocket areas. How many such cases are there? We will only know if the minister has the guts to publish a list of ownership by size of the lands in this scheme. Individual pockets already dumped with building material are not the same as virgin land with carob trees and natural character.

Incidentally, we all paid a lot for such an area with the understanding that in a civilised country such things are of the past. Revisions of boundaries for the individual pockets are already catered for by local plans where the real independent study took place.