Valletta project: FAA sees indifference to people's wishes

Raymond Sammut

Aug 13th 2009, 00:56

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Agreed. Security is also a valid point. One would hope that things would proceed slowly rather than try to meet "the-next-election-deadline" for political scoring. There clearly needs to be a bi-partisan approach and try to think through all the aspects carefully before committing in a big way. I would suggest that replicates of the model be made and distributed around the larger towns on the island in order to get more people involved. I see no reason, for example, why architects could not be invited to give public talks at local councils halls using PowerPoint slides and encourage public discussion.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 12th 2009, 19:16

@Raymond Sammut

My bigger concern is one of basic security.....

How can you ever secure a building containing all the Top Government executives when you build it on a few flimsy stilts?? And when, to boot, you allow the general public to stroll freely day and night beneath it!!!.....

It seems that the Prime Minister and the other Parliamentarians have not thought of this rather critical aspect of their OWN wellbeing!.....

All it takes is a tiny explosive device on one of the columns and all of Parliament comes crashing down like a house of cards! So this may yet be another poorly thought design by Piano.....

Raymond Sammut

Aug 12th 2009, 10:42

My only concern is Parliament House. If this project went ahead as is, I would expect that Parliament would be built on shock absorbing material. It's the kind of thing they do commonly in Wellington, New Zealand. Malta, being the last of a string of dead volcanoes all the way to Mt Etna, is notorious for earth tremors, and this would be an untested building with too much elevated weight. The Maltese have had enough heartache at this particular spot. The last thing we need is a large fissure developing in the building, or it come crashing down altogether. I do not think any chances should be taken.

Stephen Borg Cardona

Aug 11th 2009, 23:19

Nice plans in my opinion.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 8th 2009, 16:26

@ Raymond Sammut

Your view is "that Malta should take a modest and a down-to-earth approach, and give priority to its own artists. Give them a theatre centrally located, technologically advanced, adaptable, and placed under an able and dedicated custodian. With a quarterly programme containing the right mix of marketable musical and theatrical features, it should involve a variety of people and succeed."

So dear Mr Sammut, we are in agreement after all... I fully subscribe to your view... With the simple addition of wrapping it all up in one attractive *Building*... A building to boost the profile, the atmosphere and the allure of "Opera" on the general public.

Raymond Sammut

Aug 8th 2009, 09:52

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

As a Melbournian for quite a few years, I spent lots of time at the Arts-Centre near Southbank. There is nothing grotesque about the place, surely. Over recent years, a great deal of commercial development and very large scale government projects were being carried out in the vicinity, where all the "eyesores" have now been removed.

Sydney has traditionally attracted much larger crowds in most activities because of it being the premier state. Of course, thousands each year are attracted to the SOH, and Melbourne and Brisbane always had trouble competing. The point I was making before is that within Valletta there is simply not the space for a theatre of the size found in large cities. I merely used Melbourne as an example because of my familiarity with the place.

My view is that Malta should take a modest and a down-to-earth approach, and give priority to its own artists. Give them a theatre centrally located, technologically advanced, adaptable, and placed under an able and dedicated custodian. With a quarterly programme containing the right mix of marketable musical and theatrical features, it should involve a variety of people and succeed.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 7th 2009, 22:38

@Raymond-Sammut

I'm so pleased that you mention Australia. I watched a fair bit of Opera down South!..... (I can wholeheartedly recommend the Aida!)..... Ok, so sets start with the technical comparisons:

-- Sydney's Opera-House can seat 1507 in the proscenium theatre............
-- Melbourne's State-Theatre, at the Arts-Centre, seats 2077..............
-- City populations are virtually identical (Melbourne=3.9M), (Sydney=4.4M)..........

And yet, (in those theatres alone), Melbourne saw just 98,000 Opera patrons while Sydney's got over double that amount with almost 210,000!..........

Now ask Jørn Utzon, why this is the case: Is it the building? YES!! *JUST* the building!!...... The beauty of Sydney's Opera House has made it a UNESCO World Heritage Site, WHILE the Melbourne version can't wait to be forgotten, it's a grotesque eye sore!

Can you imagine one place in history for Piano's "Football-Pitch with chairs"? I think not!... That's why attendance will be poor.. It'll Fizzle out!

It's the building (and the atmosphere it creates) that makes half the opera! The artists will follow accordingly... So deal with it!... There's also a big distinction between having enough space for all the facilities required for a 2012 Opera House... and enough space to also house 3000 spectators....

Raymond Sammut

Aug 7th 2009, 18:25

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

There is not enough space for a 2012 "Grand new Opera House" within Valletta. But small Malta does not need one, anyway.

In Melbourne, for example, the Concert Hall would typically be 3/5 empty on weekdays, and only nearly full on a Saturday night. The theatre next to it would need to have some very strong event before you could fill it up to capacity. And that's with a population of five million.

What do you mean by "build something totally different"? Is not what Piano is proposing "totally different"?

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 7th 2009, 17:44

@Raymond Sammut Well you again purposely seem to miss to point... When, Piano shies away from the challenge of building a Grand new Opera House, it could be because of one or combination of the following reasons: 1) It's truly an impossible undertaking, because there is really not enough space. This does not tarnish his reputation - but in this case the wigs should have given him the liberty to build something totally different - or maybe he wasn’t bold enough to suggest it. 2) He's burdened with the judgement of posterity - making him much less of a great man. 3) He's been denied the resources that it takes to build one, and has in fact been asked to dedicate his efforts on a new Parliament... He is an Architect...The wigs are his clients... So abiding by the terms of reference, as presented to him, does not make him any less of a great man... It simply means that he listens to his clients' requests. But in the absence of a clear public understanding of *who* has taken the ultimate decision, he remains squarely in the cross-hairs of public criticism... This was perhaps what he never bargained for...

Raymond Sammut

Aug 7th 2009, 11:42

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

There are, in my view, some salient remarks in reference to Mr Piano in your comment: (1) "I think Piano is not showing us anything, really...", (2) "...his fear of being criticised by history...", (3) "Piano's greatest limitation in this project wasn't himself, or any theatrical consideration, but the terms of reference given to him by those 65 old wigs...", and (4) "Piano is a great man...".

I like to ask you, if it's OK, don't you think there are some contradictions in these remarks?

For example, if I were a great man, I would not allow 65 old wigs to put any limitations on me. I would simply tell them where to go.

Also, in your remark (2), I would have no reason to be afraid of posterity so long as I have abided by the terms of reference. This is because the responsibility would be entirely upon those who issued the terms, not me.

And if Piano is not showing us anything, he should then not be getting more than what he bargained for, and no-one should be criticizing him.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 7th 2009, 09:31

@Raymond-Sammut

Well the tax-payer is not being expected to pay for nostalgia indefinitely...
S/he is WILLING to pay for it ONCE!

Because it has been a pipe dream for way too long and this was just the opportunity we were all waiting for.

But we feel swindled: The money the tax-payer had saved for the Opera House risks being siphoned off to satisfy the pipe-dream of 65 old wigs that have become tired of being driven all the way down Republic Street every morning!

Quite frankly, I think Piano is not showing us anything, really... His reluctance to commit our dreams into stone could be interpreted as his fear of being criticised by history... Well I think he got more than he bargained for... because he now ended up criticised in the present as well... let alone history!

To tell you the truth, I don't believe that either... Piano is a great man... What I DO believe is that Piano's greatest limitation in this project wasn't himself, or any theatrical consideration, but the terms of reference given to him by those 65 old wigs...

I'm sure it's them that are to blame! It's always about them in the end!

Raymond Sammut

Aug 7th 2009, 04:01

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

The "romantic view" of an arts theatre and the "impressive classic Opera House" are a pipe dream. The tax-payer cannot be expected to pay for nostalgia indefinitely. Once this dream is cast in stone, it will remain so -- immutable like a pagan colossus while the public keeps changing around it. It will acquire a quiescent state and eventually becomes another museum.

There is enough space for theatrical activity, definitely. Piano is showing us how we can utilise this space optimally, both in terms of physical dimensions and of artistic possibilities. He is obviously reluctant to give us the final version because he knows there cannot be one.

His idea is not for those who fantasise about finding a niche. It offers, instead, a level playing field. It invites everyone irrespective of their tastes or how good they are; so long as they genuinely like theatre art. Piano has been studying not just Valletta's architecture, but more importantly, the common people on Valletta's streets. Now they have to ask, how well will my child fare if he/she wants to play the violin or sing some of Verdi's lines.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 6th 2009, 15:25

@Raymond Sammut

Of course "It is not hard to see that the proposal is a rudimentary cage which is not committing itself to specifics"!!!... and it is precisely this what makes it so offensive to most people having a more romantic view of what Valletta should look like and what facilities it should boast with.

Now try impressing anybody who's anybody on the world stage with the prospect that Valletta will soon be sporting 2500 recycled square meters of just about nothing... all dedicated to the ever changing whims of the Maltese artist. It will be forgotten in a fortnight!

The proposal for the theatre site is as bland and versatile as an empty football pitch... We did not need Piano for that, my four year old son could have come up with a better one.

So now, given your assurances that there IS enough space for theatrical activity... I would suggest going ahead with my original option: That is building a complete and impressively classic Opera House with all the modern facilities that this so requires.

This building would in itself entice the people to visit and pay the premium and, in doing so, discover the Maltese artist.

Raymond Sammut

Aug 6th 2009, 07:24

@ Chris Calleja

It makes sense that the Maltese government directs much more funds to Parliament House while initially not committing too much to the theatre. Expenditure is not a measure of performance. Spending the right amount at the right time equates with good management.

Parliament House is an entity which is static and established, and hence predictable with low risk. The theatre, on the other hand, is dynamic and enigmatic. It will have running costs to be paid for from tickets sold; both will be difficult to forecast. The two structures are therefore the contrast of each other, and Piano has got the balance right.

And why is the proposed entrance "bleak"? Piano's proposition is pedestrian friendly, sun-lit and uncluttered. We all need to walk and to enjoy our walking with gardens around us; not combustion engines.

Raymond Sammut

Aug 6th 2009, 02:10

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

What is central here is the Maltese artist --and their capacity for flair-- and not imported "showmen". It would be tragic to send the Maltese artist "to Ta QALI and instead BUILD something ELSE" on the Opera House site. Dr Gonzi has already attempted to appropriate the site for politicians. And the argument that there is not enough space has already been tried to no avail.

The popular claim that Piano's proposal is "a half-built Theatre" is unfounded. It is not hard to see that the proposal is a rudimentary cage which is not committing itself to specifics. This I am convinced is the right way to go for the Maltese artist who faces a fluxing public. This public is reliably responding quickly to technology, which in turn keeps changing fast. Piano comes up with the structure which will always be ready for the equipment that technology will throw at it in the coming years. It should be firmly in concrete that if the Maltese artist is going to succeed and survive, they are going to do it by staying abreast of technology and not by nailing themselves to marble and stone.

Chris Calleja

Aug 5th 2009, 17:57

One can also understand that the only real work has been only applied to the parliament building. The entrance proposed is bleak...one hour work. The theatre maybe a day, not by Piano neither an acoustician just a guy that wants to sell a quarter of a million acoustic assissting system (glorified sound system for this space). But most of the work has been put into the parliament building. I dont blame FAA just look at the picture its enough to know there is nothing of major value architecturally. Even as regards to the environmental building study .....only the parliament building !!?? There is not much to comment about but it seems to me that most of the islands' face has degenerated so much that even Piano was captivated by this.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 5th 2009, 15:54

@Raymond Sammut

But this is where we disagree quite diametrically...

IS IT or IS IT NOT big enough for theatrical activities? Yourself, Piano, The Prime Minister and many others really have to make up their minds!

The fallacy that everyone seems to be buying, is that by simply doing away with a roofed structure we can create a theatre that is suddenly big enough for everything we want to do! Utterly FALSE!

-- If it IS big enough, then we might as well build an Opera House and I can assure you that it will be jam packed with people every single evening so long as we can attract the best showmen in the field! It will pay off very quickly indeed!

-- If it is NOT big enough, then forget about opera houses and theatres (or what have you). Just take them to Ta QALI and instead BUILD something ELSE which is worthwhile, instead of those wasted ruins! .... I will repeat: If used wisely, such a building would pay itself off even quicker than the Theatre and it would be a new jewel in Valletta.

As it stands, we will get a half-built Theatre for half-baked Opera!

Raymond Sammut

Aug 5th 2009, 07:30

@ Dr. Savior Tortell Pisani

I am not surprised that Valletta's rates for rent per square meter of floor space are among the highest in the country. This opportunity cost, however, is irrelevant to Maltese artists because they cannot have their cake and eat it too. The Opera House site is exclusive for the arts. This is the reason why it remained vacant and practically untouched for 60 years. Probably the biggest economic and cultural waste post-WWII Malta has suffered.

I want to see all Maltese artists, whose artwork is theatre dependent, to have a theatre that would enable them to be in the money and not dependent on government funding. But to earn their money, they will have to come up with the artwork that the contemporary public is prepared to buy tickets for, and not by renting out floor space.

It is here where Mr Piano comes in with his lateral (rather than grandiose) idea. He is presenting them with a malleable theatre that would enable them to do just that. A theatre which is ready to adapt to both artists and audiences alike rather than expecting everyone to adapt to its "majestic" rigidness.

Raymond Sammut

Aug 4th 2009, 15:26

@ g.portelli

I was only saying to Dr Tortell Pisani that Valletta already has several classical buildings which he was alluding to. I didn't mean theatres. Of course, post-war Valletta always lacked a world-class theatre.

I see it as a positive thing if a new theatre can be readily accessible, versatile and a revenue earner rather than hermetic and incurring losses. I also do not think the Prime Minister of the day would have jurisdiction as to its primary function. Maltese artists, under suitable management, would have ownership to that role, at least in principle. I do not think anyone will be able to take that privilege from them.

I also think your 5-month usability is pessimistic. The installation, if necessary, of a mechanized canopy would actually make it an all-year-rounder, while still maintaining its open air feature. This feature sure beats air-conditioning which most people hate. There is nothing worse than an enclosed place with no elbow room and stuffy.

As to accommodating a philharmonic orchestra, this is always going to be limited by the block size and not by building type. Mr Piano has also emphasised that acoustics will be a main strength.

Paul Baldacchino

Aug 4th 2009, 09:37

What is it with us Maltese and open spaces. Everytime we come up with a project their seems to be no regard to open spaces, everyting must be consumed with lime stone and concrete blocks.Why not just leave the space and develop it into a dynamic introduction to Malta's historical culture, open air artistic works and other cultural motivated works. Give the city visitor some space!

g.portelli

Aug 4th 2009, 01:38

@Raymond Sammut

You really miss the wood for the trees.What has Valletta got alot of exactly? Modern fully functioning versatile theatres equipped with state of the art technology that can accomodate a philarmonic orchestra, host plays, ballet and the occassional opera, come rain or shine with perfect acoustics to boot? Where are they exactly pray tell? What Piano has come up with will translate into a white elephant. Piano's design without the state of the art equipment for the envisaged 5 months of the year that the open space can be utilised renders it nothing more than a perpetual building site. Who else in Europe will be able to boast that they house Piano's first white elephant Lucky Us Maltese tax payers and theatre goers!

NB
On the other hand if the MTA is hell bent on marketing Malta as the next Ibiza than I guess that theatre would really put Malta on the map, it is the right space for Mega parties , they do generate alot of profit no ? I am sure the Prime Minister will have no problem with a profit generating venue next to his parliament regardless of the noise pollution.

Dr. Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 3rd 2009, 21:37

@Raymond Sammut

Yes everything has to be designed with sustainability in mind BUT there any many creative ways of using a large building to make up for its upkeep... You forget that Valletta's rates for rent per square meter of floor space are among the highest in the country! So there is no question that you can make tens of millions from a beautiful building, that size, located in the sweetest spot of the Capital City - no sweat! ... So you will have to think of another excuse...

Don't get me wrong... I'm a big fan of Renzo Piano and I like most of the project... but quite frankly, I don't think that what Piano came up with for the theatre is a quarter as Majestic as the good old Royal Opera House... I'm sure you will agree!

This aspect of the project was a HUGE let down... to many Maltese citizens and visitors alike!

Raymond Sammut

Aug 3rd 2009, 13:14

@ Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

A building has to be functional and be able to earn its upkeep. The function here is theatre art, and the revenue will depend on contemporary taste. Valletta has several magnificent buildings as it is, most still as designed and build by the Knights. But their upkeep is too costly. Castile, for example, is presently being restored; a restoration that will take some 2-3 years. One simply has to be practical, and not lose sight of costing and long term viability. Piano has come up with the right idea. Have something which is technically advanced, and can adapt and survive. This is so much better than spending a great deal of money on something of which Valletta already has and which will simply keep costing more money into the future.

Dr Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 3rd 2009, 12:02

//"The public wanted a theatre and the reconstruction of the City Gate area, it never asked for a new parliament."// TRUE!!!

While I essentially like the idea of a new Parliament in freedom square, I admit that it smacks of a self-served gift, of sorts, by our Parliamentarians to Themselves!

So I must TOTALLY agree on FAA's point.... I also eagerly wanted to see the reconstruction of a Grand Operahouse - A building that would undoubtly greatly uplift the atmosphere and add some much-needed Classical Style to our City!

Now, it may be true that the old theatre site may be too small for a modern opera house BUT I really can't be bothered whether it will actually be used as an Opera house, Art Gallery, Museum or whatever else!! ... What I do want is a new MAGNIFICANT BUILDING that does justice to our beloved City!

The ONE good thing about Renzo Piano's plans not to re-build an Opera house, is that it does not preclude somebody else (with a little better taste) to actually GET ON WITH THE JOB and ACTUALLY BUILD something worthwhile in the future.... Something that we deserve and that will please us all!

Dr. Savior Tortell Pisani

Aug 2nd 2009, 22:58

>>"The public wanted a theatre and the reconstruction of the City Gate area, it never asked for a new parliament."

Joe Fenech

Aug 2nd 2009, 13:38

A major problem in this project is the budget: too small! And Gonzi wanted Piano to focus on his (Gonzi's) brilliant idea of parliament houses in the city's entrance!!! The spirit of Ciaucescu is in the air...!!

Anthony Magri

Jul 31st 2009, 17:39

The woman whose initials are enough to refer to her DCG,says she has been following the Parliament buildiing saga since the beginning and does not know, hence it does not exist, a project to build parliament where there is what we call the Main Guard. How infantile. Surely the hall itself is small but the government has the power to borrow other adjacent buildings to its satisfaction. As not to have ever been mentioned: go back a few years and research Dr. E. Fenech Adami speeches, whether budget or other official speeches in parliament and detect whether he ever mentioned "main Guard" as a place for a Parliament.

Raymond Sammut

Jul 30th 2009, 23:10

I disagree with FAA when they say that the Opera House is merely being given a "face lift". This is not true. Renzo Piano is very serious when he says that he intends to "build" a new Opera House. His plan is by no means an unfinished structure. It is a highly imaginative design which offers an open-ended structure conducive to technological innovations into the future. Piano's proposal is not only about aesthetics but more importantly about adaptability and survivability as technologies and peoples' tastes keep changing.

I also disagree with FAA when they accuse Piano of "focusing" more on parliament. They clearly have no justification for this claim. Both structures are equally demanding on the architect. No-one should be fooled by the technicalities that are involved in the design of the skeleton-like residue near-by. And yes. Malta needs and deserves a free-standing Parliament House which has been long in coming. Freedom square is an ideal location, with future positioning of the Law Courts on the other side of the entrance to complement the Legislature. Although I agree with FAA on their emphasis in regard to funding and consultation, these nevertheless remain issues for the government and the public.

W Spencer

Jul 29th 2009, 16:38

The proposed new City gate shows a complete lack of imagination. At the City gate, the square block at the left of the picture, looks like a huge block of rock coming out of the wall, to slide across and close the Gates. Its too modern for a City like Valletta which has so much history. Do not dumb it down !!

veronica galea

Jul 28th 2009, 22:43

I think FAA really hits the spot. If the letters and articles published in the Times of Malta over the past few years are anything to go by, then effectively what they are saying is to give the Maltese something to uplift their spirit. The Piano plans for politics in a bunker on Freedom Square and an unfinished cultural space on the former opera house site is really no answer to this wish.

Joe Fenech

Jul 28th 2009, 22:12

We need to pull down buildings not more add more cluttering!! Give Valletta a majestic entrance! All those arcades should be demolished and fill the place with trees, jet fountains, then merge Freedom square into Kastilja square. Gonzi, I can draw it for you on a piece of paper and send it to you if you can't visualise it!

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 27th 2009, 21:42

@Antoine Vella. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I assume you are attacking Ms. Vella from your position as a PN Councillor? It is because of people like you that the PN loses popularity, party apparatchiks who can only attack people, pouring venom, do not score points for PN but alienate all but the most die hard of supporters. If you were not so unreasonable and intolerant, you and your party would have more credibility.

@Daphne Caruana Galizia. Read the above as most of it applies to you.

Antoine Vella

Jul 27th 2009, 09:33

Astrid Vella
Why do you continuously twist my words and reply to something I haven't said? I accused FAA of actually speaking on behalf of the public not of pretending to do it. Phrases like "the public wanted.", "the wishes of the people..", are real enough and you cannot deny them. I think your "pretend" is the Maltenglish version of "tippretendi".

There are valid reasons for believing that FAA has abandoned all pretence of being politically non-aligned. Why should an 'environmental' (ahem) NGO be against the building of a parliament house? How is the environment going to be damaged? On the contrary, the proposed building will be a trend-setting model of 'green architecture'. You're not even criticising the style and its urban environment but attacking the concept of having Parliament meet in a building in Freedom Sq. That has nothing to do with environmental protection and everything to do with childish political pique.

Joe Fenech

Jul 27th 2009, 00:36

NO to a theatre/opera: This is pure nostalgia! That theatre won't be enough to stage ''it-tejatrin tal-parrocca' !!!!!

NO to parliament: That is just totalitarian, propagandistic architecture favoured by dictators. Only dictators will have parliament 'in the face'. Gonzi change your attitude unless you put your name down in history as the Maltese Ciaucescu!

YES to a nice space with jet fountains, trees! See the Antigone quarter in Montpellier by Rocardo Bofill !!

Let's also not forget that although Piano is famous, he is not a specialist in urban conversion projects (in fact, no one employs him for these kind of projects)! The Maltese government got him because he was the only famous architect they knew (let's not forget that we have 'avukati tal-bumper to bumper' leading us not some intellectual elite!). On top, they did not let him come up with an artistic vision of his own.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Jul 26th 2009, 22:36

Astrid, please stop being disingenuous. It really doesn't wash.

Your statement was "Guggenheim approached Malta" and not "The Guggenheim Museum approached a private company in Malta." 'Malta' means the Maltese state, as represented by the Maltese government. It does not mean Borg & Camilleri Ltd, a Maltese company.

As for the palace and the new plans for it, you come across as being largely indifferent to the fact that the entire building will be given over to museums. Your reply that you agree with Daniel Cilia is risible: if you really agreed, you wouldn't have done so in passing on the timesofmalta.com comments-board only after being specifically challenged about it.

So the plans for a parliament built over the Main Guard were drawn up in the 1920s. You should have said so, instead of trying to give the impression that they are current. Anything drawn up in the 1920s when there were far fewer MPs than there are today and when parliamentary business was completely different is quite obviously irrelevant. I cannot for one moment imagine why you would mention it, unless it was to mislead by leaving out the fact that these plans are 80 years old.

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 26th 2009, 17:49

@Marvin Farrugia. Ms. Vella appears to have answered this better than I could so why don't you get someone to read it to you?

Astrid Vella

Jul 26th 2009, 16:01

@ Marvin Farrugia: you are right and you have made me realise that this is partly what has provoked such a reaction, other than the one of the usual Government apologists who are so intolerant of anyone voicing anything that remotely challenges their idols.

In fact the title of our PR was: Renzo Piano Plan for City Gate, Parliament Building and Opera House

And the first line read:
Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar (FAA) has studied the Renzo Piano plans for Valletta’s City Gate area, aspects of which are worthy of merit.

Unfortunately this was given a very different slant in the Times' re-writing of our piece. I repeat, FAA is apolitical, does not pretend to speak on behalf of the general public but as a civil society group has a right to speak outside the political spectrum, which is as things should be in a democracy. Unfortunately, however in this country there seems to be very little understanding of the role of non-political civil society groups.

Astrid Vella

Jul 26th 2009, 14:50

@Daphne: We do not for a moment disagree with Daniel Cilia that shifting the armoury back to the original rooms is a great idea and can only attribute your mistaken claim to your obsession to paint a poor image of FAA at all costs.

We totally support this idea which would be beneficial even from the point of view of conservation of the artifacts which has suffered since they were moved to the damper lower floor. We simply don’t think that the shift of venue will necessarily make a great difference in the number of tourists visiting Malta. On the other hand, a fully-functioning national theatre would attract a fresh market of cultural tourists. Even the small-scale concerts held at Sta Caterina d’Italia are drawing repeat visits let alone what the combined efforts of the Malta Philharmonic Orchestra and the Dance Council could achieve if they were given a home.

Astrid Vella

Jul 26th 2009, 14:45

@ AntoineVella, FAA does not pretend to speak on behalf of the public. We use the term 'public' in the narrative sense,ie when we say “the public was repeatedly promised the rebuilding of the theatre” we cannot replace it by “FAA was repeatedly offered the rebuilding of the theatre” as clearly it was not.

@Daphne,as one who does not know what I’m talking about, I’m surprised you are asking me so many questions.

I happen to know that Guggenheim approached private investors(please note that I never it approached the Maltese Government) with a proposal which was deemed to be too costly so the idea was not pursued.I have seen the correspondence,so do I know what I’m talking about, but being a private company it would not be ethical to say more.

As regards the plans for a large parliament over Main Guard, these were drawn up in the late twenties and until recently were available in Government archives. We have not said that they would be suitable for today’s needs but the concept could be relevant. The footprint was not limited to the Main Guard but the building of a first floor over the flanking buildings too.

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 26th 2009, 14:31

@Daphne Caruana Galizia. Three times you ask the question do you know what you are talking about. This seems odd coming from someone who makes a living talking about things she knows nothing about. Your little rant on swine flu was not only misinformation it was downright dangerous.

As for your attacks on Astrid Vella these have now reached the point of being humorous. It is quite obvious from what you write that you are extremely jealous of the attention and respect that Ms. Vella enjoys.

The good point about all this is that you are also damaging the political party that you love so much. Instead of using your position in the public eye to strengthen the PN position, you weaken its position by going off on your own little tangent.

Marvin Farrugia

Jul 26th 2009, 14:07

@James Tyrrel

So What is an NGO can u explain ? (especially an NGO that each time that it issues a press statement with the title the "people")

What these NGO s like FAA , Zmienietna , Birdlife , Ramblers , FWA , Graffitti and the rest are pressure groups which probably amount to 1000-2000 people maximum and all have some agenda. So basically we let them decide what this country needs ? If they love that much the enviroment and beleive in it let them create their own party and try to get elected then yes they can say they represent the people. I forgot yes there is a party that has as its main point in its political manifesto the enviroment and it is AD, look what happened to that party which i admired it lost votes in each election it participated.

Daphne Caruana Galizia

Jul 26th 2009, 12:30

Astrid, 'Guggenheim already approached Malta but there was no response'. You don't say. Do you actually know what you are talking about?

"plans exist for the building of a larger parliament over Main Guard" - again, do you know what you are talking about? There are no plans for a larger parliament over the Main Guard: I should know, given that I have been covering this ongoing saga since Renzo Piano's first plans in 1989. I imagine you have no idea how small the Main Guard is, as for plans for a parliament house to be built 'over' it, I can just imagine what your reaction would be to any such plans (and you would be justified in any negativity).

"tourists already visit the armoury,a change in venue would not change numbers greatly" - again, you do not know what you are talking about. Daniel Cilia's point is that returning the weapons currently displayed in another room where they do not belong to the original armoury where they do belong, which now houses parliament, is a magnificent idea. He's right.

Galea. L

Jul 26th 2009, 09:44

Antoine Vella
If you are so sure why doesn't your Gonzi hold a national referendum to see whether the people approve or not?

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 26th 2009, 03:22

@Matthew Fenech. Interesting idea that FAA should go for election. You don't seem to have grasped the concept of NGO have you? No wonder the Government is in such a mess with supporters like you!

@Antoine Vella. I assume you are attacking Ms. Vella from your position as a PN Councillor? It is because of people like you that the PN loses popularity, party apparatchiks who can only attack people, do not score points for PN but alienate all but the most die hard of supporters. If you were not so unreasonable and intolerant, you and your party would have more credibility.

Matthew Fenech

Jul 25th 2009, 21:20

200-1000 people who are members of these NGOS are dictating whats happening in this country. If FAA wants to represent the people i would recommend they go out for an election and then we will see if they represent the "people". That is the essence of democracy.

Each person who has an agenda basically opens up an NGO and starts saying he or she represents the people and this is what should be done. BTW is there a list of members of these NGOS because it would be interesting to know how many "people" they represent out of the entire population which are the people.

Antoine Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 21:06

Josephine Farrugia
"I think the main problem with FAA is not that it speaks but that it presumes it speaks on behalf of everyone, being "the public"..........Now FAA simply presupposes that it retains that momentum whenever it makes it voice heard, which is irritating many many people."

Exactly.

Antoine Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 21:01

Astrid Vella
I did not mention the 1980s so I don't know what you're going on about. Yes, I think FAA has a political agenda and no credibility as an NGO. It has no mandate to talk on behalf of anyone and this press release is just another show of arrogance.

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 25th 2009, 20:06

@Kenneth J. Borg. I agree with you totally here Kenneth especially with regard to the personal attacks on Astrid Vella. However we all know where these attacks are coming from and why. I don't think FAA need to justify what they do or say as you’re past record speaks for itself. Of course there are going to be people who disagree with what FAA are doing and those people have every right to leave comments but I'm sure it would be appreciated by all concerned if they could comment in an adult and polite way.

For example if you read the comments left below by Ms. Vella you will find that they are educated, polite and to the point. Obviously because she is so competent at what she does she is feared by certain elements of society who would like to shut her up. Unfortunately for them and fortunately for the rest of the country I doubt if it will ever happen.

Julian Zarb - Tourism Journalist

Jul 25th 2009, 19:54

Thanks Astrid for your reply...it is actually nice to see a long debate about this project.....but on the other hand we do not want to turn Valletta into a static musuem full of art galleries, cultural centres and musuems...it needs to breathe live...yes the Parliament building could be a crowd puller...look at the Reichstag building in Berlin or the Houses of Parliament in london (admittadly they are in centres that have a strong tourism industry); as for the open air theatre..Malta is an outdoor place...we need to let this happen in valletta as well, it is an experience one should enjoy! As for the bus terminus, don't forget there is a reform plan for the transport services so this should include a reform in the tremini around the island...including valletta....

Kenneth J. Borg

Jul 25th 2009, 19:38

Please leave politics out of the debate. FAA is an apolitical organisation, as per our statute which is also available online at www.faa.org.mt. If this country is to move forward, we have to abandon the mentality that any observation has to be politically motivated. It severely detracts from the validity of some comments posted online here. As do the persistent personal attacks on Astrid Vella, who after all isn't the only official in FAA, but just one from a committee of eleven.

Kenneth J. Borg - Secretary FAA.

Helen Caruana Galizia

Jul 25th 2009, 19:31

Someone (below) used the word "civilised" - I would like to stress that word and hope that readers might write in a civilised and not an infantile manner. Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar is a non-party political organisation - which simply means that, like similar organisations all over the world, it comments on issues which are political (in the sense that, ultimately, decisions are taken by politicians) BUT does not align itself to any political party. Some may find this hard to believe in our two-party society but it is true. FAA is run by a committee, not by one person. Enough said?

Miriam Cremona

Jul 25th 2009, 19:01

I was under the impression that we were supposed to be living in a democratic country but it would appear that democracy and freedom of speech in this country are a figment of the imagination. If one does not have a subservient mentality and is ready to accept anything that is imposed from above or from abroad then one is accused of having a political agenda.
I reiterate two facts. Fact 1: Government was not given a mandate by the people to spend €40 million on a Parliament building. Fact two: The rebuilding of the theatre has been an electoral promise for at least the past twenty five years. What the nation has been presented with is a roofless theatre. The added insult was to be told that the ruins have gained historical value!
FAA views stem from love for Malta and national pride in the capital city. How many of the people passing those comments spend hours a day studying documents and attending meetings in order to make a valid contribution for the benefit of Malta for no financial gain? I think not many.

Robert Caruana

Jul 25th 2009, 18:51

There was a huge popular positive feedback to Piano's Plans. Now, after 1 month FAA is complaining. We expected this. But please let us now go ahead and deliver this much needed project.

D Camilleri

Jul 25th 2009, 18:37

with this project the govt can get what IT wanted all along ,a spanking new parlaiment, at city gate, to boost our MP egos further.
while the opera house will remain just a hole in the ground, dressed up to look avant garde.
st elmo a key feature in our history still remains a dump but who cares when there are no votes involved
as clearly my govt, cannot speak for me, I (D Camilleri) will allow some of the few people I think, genuinly care about my country`s heritage and countryside to speak for me
So keep it up Astrrid

George Debono

Jul 25th 2009, 18:28

@N.Farrugia

First: there is no place for sarcasm in this debate.

Second: The press release was that of FAA, so facetious comments about Astrid are out of place. Ditto@a zammit.

@a zammit

What s so remarkable about FAA waiting a month? What is wrong in taking time to consider things?

For instance FAA may have had other priorities - or took its time to consider the matter. What's the hurry anyway?

AND why concentrate your criticism and sarcasm on FAA and not other NGOs or people who commented?

And no we at FAA don’t want anybody’s head on a plate. Don't give us that kind of rubbish.

FAA just made justified comments and that’s it. If you disagree then add your opinion but not irrelevant nonsense.

G

g. scerri

Jul 25th 2009, 18:24

The fact that the subject of the Opera House attracts such hot comment, is surely due to the fact that it is a subject dear to people's hearts. Such comments as the FAA is politically motivated etc, are really beside the point. They only serve to underline the political malaise of this island. Regarding Renzo, don't forget that he PUBLICLY ADMITTED that his first plans were not suitable. So he too is liable to fail. So those that protested 25 years ago have been vindicated. The FAA is a citizens' group that has a right to express an opinion. It does not pretend to be otherwise and it goes to an immense trouble to guard what it believes should not be lost. Others stick only to easy on-line comments. They have a right to do this of course. But let's keep it civilised. The usual Maltese habit of getting hot under the collar and descending to being personal and calling names is really puerile.

Hector Mamo

Jul 25th 2009, 18:12

@Astrid Vella

Astrid irrispondejt lil hafna nies imma mhux lili. Kif illum qed titkellem differenti mill-ahhar darba li tkellimt f'Reporter? F'Reporter ghedt li ma tarax ghalfejn ma jistax ikun hemm Parlament u teatru fl-entrata tal-Belt.. issa ghaliex qed tbiddel fehmtek?

Astrid Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 17:41

PART 3:
@ Tony Formosa: it is not us but the Prime Minister who left the horrible Mintoff housing estate out of the project. Renzo Piano had said early on that he wanted to see it demolished but we will never know why he did not include it since the brief was never made public.That is one of the strongest reasons why the area is not dignified for a Parliament. Who ever heard of a Parliament 8 meters away from a housing estate and shopping complex. St George's Square would be a much more fitting, dignified and politically-significant location.

Antoine Vella, R Spiteri; re being around in the 80s maybe you should know that I was the ONLY ONE of a staff of 110 at the Malta Development Corporation to obey the Nationalists Mnarja call-out, and subsequently lost my job – you can ask my ex-colleague Lawrence Zammit of Air Malta to confirm that.Can you say the same?My father died at 50, a victim of Lorry Sant, so you can be sure that I have no allegiance to PL, just as our committee has no allegiance to any party, hard as it might be for you to absorb that.

Astrid Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 17:33

PART 2:
Daniel Cilia:tourists already visit the armoury,a change in venue would not change numbers greatly,however they would come to Malta for a Piano theatre even more than to a Piano Parliament.Unlike Parliament anyone can enter a theatre,and that is what would really revive Valletta's cultural life and bring in millions from regular cruise liner matinees which have been requested repeatedly but cannot be accommodated at theMCC

Andrew Vinci,spot on! Guggenheim already approached Malta, but no interest was shown.
Julian Zarb: who’s asking for old style buildings? Not us.Of course we want to get rid of the bazaar,but the first thing to achieve that would be remodelling of the bus terminus which is left out of the Piano plans.A culture centre including a public library and modern contemporary art museum would draw tourists and benefit the public far more than a Parliament there-surely you of all people can see that we need more tourists in the shoulder months not in roofless-theatre summer?

Henry Mifsud:so right! It would be very mistaken to overbuild City Gate whilst neglecting the rest,especially the decaying St Elmo area,does no-one see that we are going to lose it if we don't act fast?

Astrid Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 17:21

PART 1:@A Zammit:This is very amusing. While FAA took its time,discussing the matter with consultants it was repeatedly slammed in the press and blogs for not speaking about the Piano Plans.Now that we have,and no one can accuse us of a knee-jerk reaction,we are accused of wanting to speak up on everything.

The saddest part of it is however,that our psyche cannot move on from its political mindset. Everything has to boil down to politics and few are ready to accept that having an independent mind does not mean trying to damage the government.

I repeat that we have no argument with Renzo Piano,but would simply like the Government’s brief published, as that is where the limitations lie.
@David Thake:We did not mention aesthetics and design,so I don’t know where you got the idea of a beauty contest.Joe Felice Pace:We have nothing against a new parliament being created,but it makes more sense to treat Valletta holistically &examine all the alternatives first,as some,like the Mediterranean Conference Centre and the Auberge de Baviere were being considered as a new parliament as recently as last year,while plans exist for the building of a larger parliament over Main Guard.

Josephine Farrugia

Jul 25th 2009, 17:14

Phew I've finally managed to read through all the posts.

I personally agree with having an open air theater, particularly because I think an open air gem encapsulates our Mediterranean spirit so much. Sure we won't be able to use it every single day of the year (though I remember a lovely "presepju haj" being erected there in December last year), but if we DO use it every single day of the year it won't be magical anymore.

That's my two cents worth anyway.

@James Tyrell

I think the main problem with FAA is not that it speaks but that it presumes it speaks on behalf of everyone, being "the public". I remember the 2006 campaign in Valletta, and the best thing about it was that dozens of people and NGOs from all walks of life united to support a cause. Now FAA simply presupposes that it retains that momentum whenever it makes it voice heard, which is irritating many many people.

In fact when other respectable NGOs, who have done MUCH MUCH more for the environment, speak there isn't antagonism on the blogs.

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 25th 2009, 16:41

Obviously in the eyes of the Gonzi PN bunch their little Government can do no wrong. I wonder how they would feel if some money grabbing developer decided to build a nice big apartment block in front of their home? You can slither around here running NGO's like FAA into the ground, but try and imagine what the country would be like if people like these didn't care.

Do you think for one minute your little voice in the wilderness would make a blind bit of difference to a developer or an architect? Do you think they would halt their development in front of your home? Would they? Do you think your Government would step in to help you, especially considering the developer is pumping lots of money into the Governments coffers?

Personally I think all the NGO's should shut up shop and let the country be turned into a high-rise slum. Judging by some of the comments here it would be good enough for you.

M. Bonello

Jul 25th 2009, 16:15

Most cities have their Parliaments exhibited in the most important places, including entrances. Our Parliament deserves a standalone location imho.

Mary

diana cottis

Jul 25th 2009, 16:02

Everyone has a right to comment freely on a project which will cost 80,000 Euros of public money. Half of that will be spent on a parliament building - 40,000 Euros of YOUR money on a building which nobody has asked for. The government has no mandate from the people as the new building was not specifically included in pre election promises or budgets. Now it is being cleverly marketed as part of a package which includes the longed for opera house and City Gate. The Renzo Piano Plans are impressive and would be a world class entrance for Valletta but these are just the sugar coating to disguise the bitter pill of a parliament building. It is expensive medicine too in these economic times. If we have the money then let's at least spend it on developments which have been promised to the people and in the interests of transparency and accountability let's see the brief given to the architect too.

Anthony Roberts

Jul 25th 2009, 15:39

My view is that when people go on holiday the last thing they want to see is a parliamentary building as they enter a historic city like Valletta. The theatre should come first and foremost, as a place of entertainment, as well as a beautiful building that will attract both tourist and citizen. Parliament should be kept in the background and not in the foreground as it other countries.

Julian Zarb - Tourism Journalist

Jul 25th 2009, 15:26

Perhaps people need to understand that Valletta needs to be seen as a vibrant 16th Century walled town that has chnaged systematically throughout its 400 year history. The city built by Jean de Vallette in 1566 is not the same city we see today (except for some obvious edifices that have also seen some changes) - so what is so wrong with hanging up our nostalgia and moving on...i would much rather see a clean, orderly and vibrant town than the city that is more akin of a Middle eastern souk or town! (If i really want to see these then I will visit the levant!) - you are wrong, a Parliament and an open air theatre (especially in our very very mild climate and position) are ideal to put back the soul into our city and create an interest from visitors - if the Pompidou Centre (with all its controversy) can do all that for Paris - then why not the Parliament for Valletta?

Stephanie Falzon

Jul 25th 2009, 14:52

The PM can choose to publish the brief, but I would much prefer it at this point if FAA published the amount of members it represents, because I'm sick to death of being counted as one of its members (read: The People).

Galea. L

Jul 25th 2009, 14:41

TONY FORMOSA
I need no one to speak for me but I agree with them.

TONY FORMOSA

Jul 25th 2009, 14:14

att Galea L

So you're telling us that FAA is speaking on your behalf? The FAA will never speak for me, but perhaps people like you.
Pity you did not refer to the ghastly estate building on the bastions. Not surprisingly the FAA never mantioned anything about the herrendous buildings.Viva l-perit!!!!

No taste or shame!!

TONY FORMOSA
TONY FORMOSA

Godwin Cassar

Jul 25th 2009, 13:58

@FAA

What audacity to claim to speak in my name! You're all way over your head!!!!

A.Calleja

Jul 25th 2009, 13:20

I wonder what agenda is REALLY being vented by the commenters in this blog....

Rocco Cauchi

Jul 25th 2009, 13:12

I have seen two projects which needed immediate re-arrangment after being launched. The lawcourts in Republic Street got together the lower and upper courts in one building, but soon the system had grown too big for its footprint and renovations had to be made and bridges to extensions built. Later, a change in government brought a change in plans to Mater Dei hospital and a major expenditure while not considering the lack of trained staff, doctors and nurses alike.
What about Parliament? Are we sure we are going to remain stuck to the Westminster parliamentary system, and not opt for other western alterations to it and thus, changes in the structure itself? Our system has been on for a very long time and does not always work very well. What about parliamentary statements so common in the 70s-80s? Why should we today have a customary televised press conference after each budget speech? The system needs some oiling in this electronic age, thus a revision of conscience and thinking about the soul (the system itself first) which gives spirit to the body (then the building).
In this case too, it seems that we are again putting the cart before the horse.

Henry Mifsud

Jul 25th 2009, 13:02

@ vincent.e.galea

The St. Elmo option for the Houses of Parliament I really like and perhaps is better than the one I suggested outside Valletta. Or perhaps at even lesser expense and ideally located with better harbour views, how about considering Auberge De Baviere ? This majestic building, as Auberge de Castille, is in dire need of rehabilitation.

May I reiterate that Valletta deserves to be tackled with dignity, but we would be very mistaken to think that we shall achieve this by overbuilding the area one finds on entering our capital city whilst neglecting the rest, especially the parts on the water shore. We do not need to increase the building of the existing footprint but rather rejuvenate what has been left in decay for many years.

I am sure that these options have not been presented to Prof. Piano. Politics apart, there needs to be good strategic thinking and planning besides very sound management decisions to see the real transformation taking place. And whoever came up with the milestones for completion, please stop insulting our intelligence by roping completion dates with the next general election. I truly believe that Prof. Piano (besides the Maltese general public) deserves better.

a zammit

Jul 25th 2009, 12:53

@ P. Cassar..don't speak on my behalf please, we've been waiting SIXTY YEARS for these projects now lets do them for god's sake!!


AND IF I MAY ASK ONE QUESTION: A MONTH HAS PASSED SINCE THE PIANO PLANS WERE REVEALED...WHY DID ASTRID & CO KEEP SILENT FOR A WHOLE MONTH????? WHAT MADE THEM SPEAK NOW AND SO LATE IN THE DAY?? WHOSE HEAD DO THEY WANT ON PLATE NOW??

N.Farrugia

Jul 25th 2009, 12:51

I have an idea! Why doesn't the government scrap the whole idea and commission Astrid Vella and Co to draw a plan of the whole project. Being such an intelligent environmentalist she would surely come out with a excellent plan and the whole of Malta would thank her for solving the never-ending problem. Come on Astrid give it a try!! We're all waiting for it!!

C.Agius

Jul 25th 2009, 12:49

When somene expresses his opinion he is stamped - Either Blue or Red , immaterial if he's right , wrong or is entitled to his/her opinion . This is the main reason that we have to lump everything that comes our way by the untouchables. MPs).

This is my humble opion ( and I'm one of the people) :
City Gate to its original
Opera House to its orignal glory

Both locations are part of our history.
Parliament Building - do we rally need one? The gallery is almost always empty and so are the Hon. Members seats.

In my opinion, the number of parliamentarians should first be reduced to a maximum of 30 members and then find a suitable place outside Valletta and let the taxpayer and the tourists enjoy the gem as built by gentlemen for GENTLEMEN.

john galea

Jul 25th 2009, 12:48

it seems that faa has grow to a partit tal le jew ahjar partitin tal le.... or astrid is seeking to enter a political party by blowing in the wind

James A. Tyrrell

Jul 25th 2009, 12:45

@David Thake. You say, ‘I want my Country's image to be in the hands of professionals whose stake their reputation on their work’. Do you mean professionals like Mepa DCC boards and camera shy architects? These ‘professionals’ are destroying your country. At least FAA is doing their best to preserve what is left.

@Anthony Briffa, I’m trying my best to get you invited to a Teeny Beach bridge game but no luck I’m afraid, as nobody wants you!

I have no doubt that Piano is a very competent person but he can only work to the brief he is given. The Maltese people elected this Government so don’t the same Maltese people have the right to see exactly what Piano was asked to do? Yes the area as it stands at present may indeed be a mess but does that mean that anything is better than it is? A roofless national theatre. Only in Malta!

P.Cassar

Jul 25th 2009, 12:44

ATTENTION ALL BLOGGERS, OPINIONISTS, LETTER-WRITTERS ETC ETC
What are we all writing about if, by the looks of it, everything is ready baked. Nobody has informed us what is exactly decided and what not. We are all probably barking up the wrong tree.
So much for consultation by Gonzipn.

a zammit

Jul 25th 2009, 12:41

FAA IS SLOWLY BUT SURELY REPLACING THE LABOUR OPPOSITION. ASTRID & CO WANT TO HAVE A SAY ON EVERYTHING; SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE, STOP PROJECTS AND DICTATE TO THEIR HEART CONTENT ... IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THIS IS MAKING THE PL OPPOSITION IRRELEVANT

Robert Caruana

Jul 25th 2009, 12:40

I bet we will see Astrid as a PL candidate in next General or MEP elections.
Wait and see!

Daniel Cilia

Jul 25th 2009, 12:28

.... parliament project that has no touristic ... benefit - what about the fact that Malta will be getting back the Palace Armoury back to its original site... does not this help tourism? Also any Renzo Piano project in the World has become a touristic attraction in itself. The project will be published in magazine and books with a World wide audience. All free and good publicity to Malta and the Maltese!

vincent a galea

Jul 25th 2009, 12:09

WHY PERSIST IN PIQUES, POLITICS, AND HIDDEN AGENDAS ??? !!!
It is there glaring everybody in the face and even contributions in the papers confirm it:
RESTORE THE ORIGINAL OPERA HOUSE
RESTORE THE ORIGINAL ENTRANCE
KILL 2 BIRDS WITH ONE STONE BY PLACING PARLIAMENT AT ST ELMO, OVERLOOKING MAJESTICALLY THE GRAND HARBOUR; LIKE THE UK HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT OVERLOOKS THE THAMES...
A N D F O R H E A V E N ' S S A K E S A V E O U R C O F F E R S M I L L I O N S !!!!!!!!

Henry Mifsud

Jul 25th 2009, 12:04

My Forte view’s on Piano’s (Part 2)

If it was up to me, not only I WOULD NOT build Freedom Square but I would have demolished the hideous building on the other side and give St. James and St. John's their deserved dignity. I would have built an underground car park beneath a grandiose piazza and build the opera site fittingly rather than leave it as some dated (not an antiquity?) ruin. The apartments and shops can surely be accommodated elsewhere. Incidentally, if I interpreted Piano's model correctly, the present building which is to stay, is also being modified as it has been left hollow in the middle thus doing away with the 'Burger King' outlet.... not a bad idea really.

And what about the bus terminus? What about the original plans to have this shifted underground? Only then we can truly boast that we are giving Valletta the DIGNITY it deserves!

Henry Mifsud

Jul 25th 2009, 12:02

My Forte view’s on Piano’s (Part 1)

Parliament House might be very functional for this day and age; the problem is its location. I would build it exactly as Prof. Piano designed it, only on the site where the Independence arena is and move all government offices to that area.

The Opera House site is OK though I wonder what was Piano thinking when he was at his drawing board... Perhaps as an Italian he wanted to relieve the pains of WW2 and give Malta a monument entitled "Lest we forget".

City Gate is OK although I'd rather have the original designs by Piano presented 20 odd years ago.

The entire project might give dignity to the city but is completely insensitive to the ever surmounting social problems in the area; such as parking, etc.

g.portelli

Jul 25th 2009, 11:48

@ the apologists

Did the brief say 'build something for the sake of building whatever that may be' ? Was that the best case scenario for tax payers' money ?

Why bother with a new parliament and why bother with a roof over it.
Politicians' dulcet and truthful timbre on amplifiers come across beautifully at Luxor , Mile end and the 'Fosos' on Net and on SuperOne. Where better to express the will of the people than in a roofless parliament come rain or shine, petards, mega parties or a grigalata?

@ D. Thake
Prof Piano's esteem is not being questioned although comparing what he dished out to the Maltese people for a National Theatre and what he thought the city of Rome deserved in his Parco della Musica should set one thinking. That is why the brief he got three years ago needs to be made public. The Professor must have acted on a brief , a cheap one by the looks of it! Well it also looks like he subcontracted the theatre bit doesn't it ?
PS
And why exactly is St James depicted as an annexe of parliament ? Was that part of the brief as well?

Joseph Galea

Jul 25th 2009, 11:26

I am convinced that back in ancient Greece when it was decided to build the Parthenon on the Acropolis there was an ancient Greek equivalent of the FAA who protested violently that the new building would spoil the skyline and that the "people" objected to it.

Vince Buhagiar

Jul 25th 2009, 11:25

Realistic, thinking,
Can we Maltese leave out politics for one moment in time?
I am sure that there are some who like the project but not all, and at the same time there are some who does not like the project but not all.
This is the best moment for us Maltese to show others that we can agree on something that it’s national.
I suggest that everyone loosen a bit and listen what others are saying.
After all, we are all Maltese and we all have the right for our opinion.
Less is lesser then = but = is lesser then more.
Nobody is perfect and decisions best taken collectively rather than apart.

R. Balzan

Jul 25th 2009, 11:20

Interesting that the FAA accuse government of "an utter lack of consultation" and yet they claim to speak on behalf of the people.. so my question is: What consultation has the FAA carried out to justify it's claim that it is speaking on behalf of the people?

a tonna

Jul 25th 2009, 11:19

Is there any project good for FAA. How many members does the faa have to say that the group represent the public

Jeffrey Zammit

Jul 25th 2009, 11:14

My opinion. I think the project should go ahead. The only thing I regret is that the national theatre should be reconstructed. I am not going to debate whether it should be re-constructed to its former glory. I am not even debating whether it should be built as a theatre. The location is meant for a building. I am viewing this part of the project as an escapism from reality. The Maltese nation have debated for 60 years about this bombed eye-sore and all of a sudden it is given a face-lift which is definitely not in the style that most Valletta buildings are built. We are going to have a "modern" scaffolding for an open theatre which will be prone to all natural elements such as wind, sound, heat, rain ... and why not pigeon blessings. I see this part of the project as a way of telling the world that we have built an open theatre in remembrance of our incompetence.

Charles Taliana

Jul 25th 2009, 10:44

Lets Build it as it is, it has been a long time now for a sore eye. I am a Valletta born and bred and am fed up of people whinging so what no mass rallies any more in that area tough luck.
Keep it going Larry.

Paul Caruana

Jul 25th 2009, 10:43

I said it before, and will say it again....irrespective of all the fancy words said to the contrary.....keep freedom square as an open space (but stop using it as a parking space). Otherwise, it should be full steam ahead for the project.

Parlament can stay where it is, thank you very much. If our MPs are running out of space, there is actually a very simple solution - reduce their numbers!

Henri Zammit

Jul 25th 2009, 10:43

Well i agree, about the building of the Theatre and city gate , but i like some alterations, City Gate be close to as it was before, Theatre with the roof, and if they build the parliament , better build without roof so we will know what is going on...and not the Opera House without roof...

Rocco Cauchi

Jul 25th 2009, 10:39

Be it Parliament, or a Theatre or any other thing mortal or immortal, we seem to be forgetting that we are living in an electronic age where direct personal access is becoming less preferable (we prefer our armchairs at home) and more difficult (consider the parking problems created for all such projects).
Given that land and space are ever becoming perennial problems, shouldn't we be thinking about a holistic national plan about an efficient electronic intercommunication around the islands, thus surpassing the major transport problems we are facing?

P.Cassar

Jul 25th 2009, 10:37

THE FAA HIT THE NAIL PRECISELY ON THE HEAD
Many have been simply blinded because the name Piano was mentioned. THE FAA RIGHTLY ASKED FOR THE BRIEF GIVEN TO THE ARCHTECT. This is extremely important because we would know what limitations Piano had and the real reasons why the plans developed as they did. We have already come to know that the theatre is roofless( funny this one, plastic seats and all in a NATIONAL theatre) because of lack of funds!!!.
Till now all bloggers missed the draft bit, probably some on purpose because their aim was the messenger not the message (usual nationalist tactic)
I, for one, will never say yes just because the architect is world reknown after all he himself admitted that he does mistakes, and who does't?

Austin Faruugia

Jul 25th 2009, 10:33

@ C Sant you are right on the state of the roads something has to be done.
@ FAA you are thinking big to speak for the people;is there any good project in Malta or are all bad.(how does FAA identify to protest on Outside schemes or new projects)

Alfred Briffa

Jul 25th 2009, 10:26

FAA pull out your mask, pls once and for all!! You're making us sick! You are not representing 'the people' ..not me for sure...please specify if 'the people' are PL people!

Adrian Tanti

Jul 25th 2009, 10:22

it seems that faa is proposing a debating society. We want action from govt now and the project to begin the sooner the possible. There were 60 years of time to propose other ideas.If we take faa idea we will have to wait another 60 years.
Trying to be always popular would be like a boonerang as I see it as other said the usual gem gem

Galea. L

Jul 25th 2009, 10:21

Tony Formosa
WELCOME TO A CITY GATE WITHOUT A GATE, A ROOFLESS THEATRE AND A PARLIAMENT ON STILTS IN A FORTIFIED CITY BUILT BY GENTLE FOR GENTLEMEN AND DESTROYED FIRST BY THE MODERN VANDALS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE PN GOVERNMENT IN 1964 AND THE GONZI AND PIANO VANDALS IN 2009.
A FUTURE GOVERNMENT WILL AGAIN HAVE TO PULL EVERYTHING DOWN AS THE PRESENT GONZI IS DOING AND IN THE PROCESS CENSORING HIS PREDECESSOR FOR THE FASCIST CITY GATE. THE ONLY PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS NOT THEY WHO ARE PAYING PERSONALLY FOR THEIR MISTAKES, BUT THE PEOPLE THROUGH THEIR TAXES.

Christopher Sant

Jul 25th 2009, 10:20

How can the goverment dare to embark on such a project when it lacked the ability to offer decent residential streets and pavements? When foreigners come to our roads, they are amazed how an EU country can have such awkward streets. Priorities please!

v.pulis

Jul 25th 2009, 10:19

@ Hector Mamo
Min rid igawdi l-palazz u l-armerija (kienet fejn kienet) ma kellu xejn x'izommu. Issa qed nittamaw li l-Maltin se jmorru bil gzuz izuru l-palazz!
Il progett tal Belt ahjar jibda jissemma il- progett tal parlament ghax f'daqqa wahda il bini tal parlament sar l-aktar parti importanti tal progett. Il 'bieb'9li mhu bieb xejn) u t-'teatru'(li mhu teatru xejn) hadu backbench.
@ Ernest Vella
The tourists do already visit the palace, the armoury and the parliament if they are so inclined. Renzo Piano was restricted to focus on the parliament building when this idea was trust onto him. The cost is estimated at Euro 80 million. One must deduct Renzo Piano's fee from that sum. The Menqa project is to cost Euro 130 million! According to the artist's impression this project consists of a huge concrete area reclaimed from the sea and some seating facilities and this is going to be a totally maltese project. Somewhere it just doesn't add up.

R Spiteri

Jul 25th 2009, 10:17

@FAA

you don't represent the general public.

you represent a bunch of people who have an agenda, who have their mind at rest re. income, who love to appear in the media, who are attention seekers, who just enjoy feeling popular when they are walking by a promenade.

so please don't speak on others' behalf. just speak on your clear agenda. You are not th people who knock on people's doors to help them out. You just sit down to a laptop and type your press releases in order to gain personal popularity. You should have been there in the 80's....or when Sant toured the Maghtab with a helicopter....or when Muscat strived hard to make Malta lose funds for Sant Antnin project......your agenda is clear enough.

Victor Abela

Jul 25th 2009, 10:15

this is much too much......is anything good in Malta. Now even Piano ?Does the FAA prefer a dirty parking area in the square... what does the FAA propose this time!!!!
@ Joe Cauchi
Yes you are simply right
@ l cordina
Yes yours is the people perception out here(now that everyone is speaking in the people's name)
Now I am expecting the next marketing or propaganda move from FAA

Anthony Magri

Jul 25th 2009, 10:15

Once architect E Piano did not agree with the building of Parliament instead of the Theatre he should have shown other places that perhaps are more suitable for such a building and not let him do as he thought. As it appears Gonzi and Gatt proposed the theatre site for Parliament, Arch. Piano did not agree and instead he made his own decision to build parliament house in the available place at the entrance to Valletta. Gonzi and Gatt remained awed by the architect's suggestion and told him to go ahead.
Had he been shown other places available such as the Main Guard site he might have decided that yes that's the better or the best place for Parliament. The Theatre project would have remained in suspense until a more suitable economic position prevails.Everybody happy or no recrimination about the theatre, for the moment. Once Malta found oil then it could spend money lavishly on project of national prestige.

Joe Cauchi

Jul 25th 2009, 10:07

this is a gaffe astrid.......people vote in elections I think, you speak for your members and interested parties. Besides this who is running our country the FAA or Govt. And who does the FAA represent. Surely not me as this marketing machine is getting too much arrogant now. Your crusades against one person at bahrija made me go there and there are many other villas.... how come no one said a word on it or you have to be a nationalist president to be targeted.I solicit astrid to see all outside development schemes as it seems that only a section of people are being targeted by FAA

Ray Mifsud

Jul 25th 2009, 09:40

Looking at the plan I think that the parliament building will be too small because the space available. What ever we do it is always controversial because of luck of space.

The mistake that was done when the entrance of Valletta was changed to the present design cannot be repaired. I hope that we do not have another monster that we have to look at for the rest of our life.

I hope that the workmenship in this project will be one that we will be proud off and hope that the full safety precortions are adhered to.



I

L. Cordina

Jul 25th 2009, 09:35

With all due respect, but this NGO is really getting obnoxious and presumptuous. Who are they to speak on behalf of "The People"? They indisputably have no right to do so. I for one liked Renzo Piano's projects, and fully back them. And so do many others, but I certainly am not going to say that 'The People' want the project - I speak for myself, something this NGO should learn how to do.

Naturally, Astrid Vella and Co. can think whatever they please [the problem is, can they think without being biased? H*ll, apparently they can't!] Please, I beg you, army of presumptuousness, do speak your opinion, yes as a matter of fact you may now do so, but don't dare to say what 'the people think'.

At least there's a positive side to all this nonsense - when these ladies and gentlemen resort to big megaphones they are hilarious.

Antoine Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 09:32

Joe Cassar
From your post, I can only conclude that you don't know what 'messenger' is.

FAA is not a messenger - they are not relaying somebody else's message but expressing their own half-baked opinion. It is therefore quite acceptable to criticise them and, in fact, Robert Caruana and Ernest Vella have been quite restrained in their reaction. Like them I have good reason to believe that FAA have a partisan political agenda.

Moreover, FAA shows their arrogance when they speak of "the people" especially as practically all other environmental and professional NGOs have expressed their support for Piano's proposals. Even in the media including this website, there is a progressively increasing number of common people who approve of the project as announced.

John Abela

Jul 25th 2009, 09:26

the faa now must form a political party because now people are turning against the retoric and spinning and marketing of this group....... I for one lost faith in he FAA

joe felice pace

Jul 25th 2009, 09:21

Of course we need a new building for parliament. I covered parliament for 17 years in the 60s and 70s, and it was already very apparent at the time that the facilities available were highly insufficient. Parliamen is not just the debating chamber and the Speaker's office. It hosts ministers' rooms, members' rooms, opposition leader's and members' rooms. It was crammed at the time, just imagine today! Besides it would release so much space to enable the Palace return to its former glory, substantially affected by the present Chamber.

g.portelli

Jul 25th 2009, 09:21

I think it is about time the politicians responsible make public the brief they gave Renzo Piano three years ago. How the site for culture is hijacked by a parliament and totally changes the narrative needs to be clearly understood. Renzo Piano this and Renzo Piano that will not deflect from the truth. First it was all about culture and city gate , then it suddenly becomes all about a Parliament. Honest politicians shouldn't be afraid of 'We the People' should they?

m busuttil

Jul 25th 2009, 09:19

FAA - another case of Maltese gem-gem?!?!?!?
Come on people let's move on with this project - City Gate area is a national "capital" area of shame in its present condition.

Joseph Micallef

Jul 25th 2009, 09:18

@Joe Cassar,
Exactly my thoughts.

Sergio Dimech

Jul 25th 2009, 09:13

@Robert Caruana
FAA are just echoing the true feelings of the great majority of the Maltese. I also think that the Piano project places too great an emphasis on the rebuilding of parliament and much much less on the rebuilding of the opera house. How else would we end up with a tennis-court style theatre in our capital city?

Anthony Briffa

Jul 25th 2009, 09:10

So finally FAA has come out with its comments on the Piano design for the theatre and freedom square projects, surely compiled in between leisure time at Teeny Beach and tea parties at villa Bologna. What amazes me is how a handful of people from Sliema have the audacity to write in the name of the people “The public wanted a theatre and the reconstruction of the City Gate area, it never asked for a new parliament”. The decision to commission Enzo Piano to design a parliament in Freedom Square was taken by the democratically elected government of Malta though its Prime Minister and the Cabinet. There was enough consultation on the rehabilitation of the area and now it’s the time for decisions to be taken. FAA please forget city gate as you are not competent to pass any comments on this project and instead can you follow-up on the two developments in Bahrija, close to Dr. Scerri’s, and give us your input and response.

Michael Neville Cassar

Jul 25th 2009, 09:00

I am sorry to say that the city gate see going to look llike the city of Troy the only thing missing would be the wooden horse, the Valletta city has been turned upside down and for the residents little to no way out .

David Thake

Jul 25th 2009, 08:53

The FAA seems to grown far too big for its boots.

This whole idea that decisions such as the Valletta reconstruction should be the result of a popular beauty contest is ridiculous. I want my Country's image to be in the hands of professionals whose stake their reputation on their work and not on some gaggle of vociferous amateurs who have nothing better to do than criticise everything and anything done without their input.

Andrew Vinci

Jul 25th 2009, 08:49

I cannot say I agree with everything the FAA comes up with but I don't agree Parliament should be sited there. The proposed site is strategically located and with today's level of communication technology the Parliament does not have to be so site-specific.

Rather, the site could have been better made use of by consolidating a cultural hub with the construction of a "franchise" museum perhaps such as Guggenheim or Tate working hand in hand with the proposed theatre and the existing St.James Cavalier. Such buildings abroad proved to be prime catalysts for the regeneration of the cities they were located in such as Bilbao in Spain.

Hector Mamo

Jul 25th 2009, 08:46

Come on Astrid !!! Come on !

F'isem min qed titkellem ? "The People" iridu l-aqwa ghal belt. In-nies esprimew ruhhom f'dan ix-xahar kemm ilu li l-progett gie varat. Anke inti stess f'intervista fuq Reporter kont ghidt illi l-Parlament jista jinbena fl-istess inhawi imma mhux flok it-teatru. Jew issa r-rih qed jonfoh differenti !!!

Li jkun hemm Parlament gdid taf xi jfisser ? Iffisser illi l-Parlament johrog mill-palazz u nkunu nistghu ingawdu l-palazz ahna wkoll u l-armerija tmur fejn kienet.

Min ghandu ghal qalbu l-wirt storiku ta pajjizna u mhux mohhu biex jiddandan quddiem il-cameras, ghajnenh jixhelu kif jara x'hemm gej ghal belt kapitali taghna.

Dejjem konnha kburin bil-belt u gej zmien fejn ser inkunu aktar !!!!

S Galea

Jul 25th 2009, 08:44

Can FAA be positive for ... at least ... one project?

joseph micallef

Jul 25th 2009, 08:43

Here we go again! The people want this…. the people the people.......

Such claims are intrinsically dangerous and at the least terribly annoying. How can I put this FAA you do not represent the people, at most a part of it. Definitely not me

philip pace

Jul 25th 2009, 08:41

The sudden annoucement (in the beginning of this year, I believe) by the PM regarding the Govt plans re City gate and the Royal Opera House was ill timed and a bolt out of the blue.
However, regardless of the facts that; it is not in the interest of Maltese; It is not an important national issue; not all Maltese are for it as a very good proportion couldn't care less as they see it money down the drain affair, the 'wise' governemnt is quite determined to pursue this .
It is only a minor sector of Malta who is for this Piano latest design.
I think that the money which shall be provided from the public would have been spent more wisely to restore St.Elmo as from all the photos that have been published in the media show that it is in a very pitiful state. St.Elmo has more historical value than the ROH and City gate put together. If that was the case I would go for that.
This latest folly from this Government is another smokescreen exercise, it would cost more than €80,000, would not be finished on time and a mismatch!

P Agius

Jul 25th 2009, 08:38

@ Roberta Caruana

WHAt FAA is saying is what Maltese want......We Dont want a parliament in Freedom square but a decent theatre like all major capitals of the world........So the govt invested in an acoustic hall for the parliament and was left without sufficient funds to close the theatre.......In this country people have no choice......I mean after 60 years the govt should have come up with 4 alternatives and leave it up to the nation to choose (not necessarily a referendum if that implies added costs).

TONY FORMOSA

Jul 25th 2009, 08:28

* ARE WE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE FAA AIMS AT RUNNING THE COUNTRY?

SINCE WHEN THE SAME NON -GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION STARTS SPEAKING ON BEHALF 'OF THE PUBLIC' AND 'THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE'?

I FOR ONE DO NOT WANT THE FAA TO SPEAK ON MY BEHALF.

IT IS EQUALLY ANNOYING TO READ 'THE PUBLIC WANTED A THEATRE AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY GATE AREA, IT NEVER ASKED FOR A NEW PARLI|AMENT' SUCH GENERIC STATEMENTS WHICH CLAIM THAT IN OTHER COUNTRIES THEY DO THIS,THAT AND THE OTHER WITHOUT GIVING MILLION EXAMPLES.

AFTER ALL WHAT'S WRONG ON BUILDING A PARLIAMENT INSTEAD OF THE PRESENT PARKING AREA. DO OTHER COUNTRIES BRAG ABOUT HAVING A PARKING AREA AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE CAPITAL?


TONY FORMOSA
TONY FORMOSA

Joe Cassar

Jul 25th 2009, 08:28

@ Mr Robert Caruana

If you don't like the message, attack the messenger.

The FAA have simply expressed what many people, including Nationalists, are thinking. Politics has nothing to do with it.

Ernest Vella

Jul 25th 2009, 08:26

The FAA is not a political organisation and although it has the right to speak it cannot dictate. I think Enzo Piano is a serious person that made his studies infact we see many good ideas like the use of thermal airconditioning, the usage of the tunnel under the same building. Every project for sure will be better but I think that after 60 years its now time to rebuild this wound so to move really into the new millennium.

And how you can say that has no touristic value...I think that tourist will find out more about the palace when the parliament is not there abd we can go more freely in the gallery to follow the parliament as happens in other countries

Robert Caruana

Jul 25th 2009, 08:17

It getting pretty obvious that FAA have a clear political agenda. They cannot hide it any more.