We all know that physical space in Gozo is very limited but we seem not to know how to use such space to meet two conflicting needs: development on the one hand and preservation on the other.
This has turned the island’s territory into Gozo’s double-edged sword. Whichever way we go, be it towards development or preservation, there always seems to be a very sharp edge at the end of the sword, ready to cause grevious harm.
I personally experienced the sharp edges of the sword in 2007, just after my first election as councillor in Xagħra, my home village. The council was struck by a tremendous controversy on whether a number of villas should be erected on the Xagħra side of Ramla il-Ħamra.
The choice was between a project that could generate income in Gozo as opposed to the preservation of the pictoresque area, where according to Greek mythology, Calypso and Ulysses had the time of their lives.
At that time, I chose the latter option, but the decision was not an easy one.
This experience was not unique to Xagħra. In fact, Gozo had gone through a similar one in the case of development proposed for Ħondoq ir-Rummien a few years before, and probably, it will experience something similar in the case of the recently revealed Simar project.
The latter project has so far not attracted much attention from the environmentalist lobby, but things will surely change the moment the spotlight on the Żonqor issue fades and the government starts to push the Simar project instead.
There is a similar pattern to these situations. The moment an important development is announced, controversy hits it. The Gonzi administration was aware of such a pattern and its Ecogozo policy was meant to address it.
The policy was intended to strike an ecological balance in Gozo but it seems to me that Gozitans remain sceptical. The loss of support experienced by the PN in Gozo lately may be symptomatic of this sceptisism and the PL took the message, because attention on the concept seems to be diminishing.
The point is that so far the ecological balance in Gozo has not been struck and probably wont’t be in the foreseeable future either.
This begs the question why. My understanding is that many Gozitans associate “ecological balance” with constraints imposed by authorities on land they may own and on the way such land can be developed.
The scarcity of land in Gozo makes this resource precious. This amplifies the problem, because every Gozitan land-owner wants to develop his land and carve the most he can from it. When a territory is small, this is often how the community thinks.
Nobody has the right to blame such a mentality, because opportunities in Gozo have always been scarce and this transformed Gozitans into shrewd people, ready to jump on every opportunity that comes their way. Unless one is Gozitan, this social phenomenon cannot be understood.
Every Gozitan landowner wants to develop his land and carve the most he can from it
This is why many Maltese, inhabitants of mainland Malta, sometimes find it hard to understand. The mainland was always more prosperous and its inhabitants did not need to compete as fiercely as the Gozitans for opportunities.
The Maltese look at Gozo as a sort of paradise to which every now and then they can flee from the chaos of the mainland. So they often argue that the Gozitan Paradise should be kept free of development. This notion seems to enjoy wide consensus among foreigners too.
It is evident that the way forward for Gozo as perceived by Gozitans contrasts starkly with the way forward for Gozo as percieved by non-Gozitans. The destiny of the environment in Gozo depends on whether one of these perspectives is to prevail over the other or whether they can somehow be reconciled.
Of course, the ideal would be reconciliation, perhaps based on the concept of sustainable development. However, if one is to be realistic, the chances of this happening decline considerably when one remembers that ‘sustainable development’ frightens Gozitans as much as ‘ecological balance’.
I think that the emphasis, at least in the short term, should not be on these concepts but rather on the diversification of the Gozitan economy.
Diversification can contribute towards the preservation of the environmentif we manage to attract to the islandnew industries which require littlespace to operate or which can use existing empty properties, reducing the need for development.
At present, the main pillar of the Gozitan economy is tourism and we all know that most development took place to accommodate this industry. Clearly, it is not easy to diversify the Gozitan economy, so deeply rooted is it in tourism, but I honestly believe that more can be done in this respect.
Areas which we could definitely exploit more are IT and other service industries that are dependent on IT, and, this notwithstanding, the recent RS2 investment, which was a positive step. In a context where the number of Gozitans trained in these areas is on the rise, one would have expected such industries to spread farther afield.
Many point a finger at the lack of a second internet connection between Malta and Gozo but this is not enough to excuse the deficit. Clearly, the laying of a second connection would be ideal but it is evident that the authorities are dragging their feet because there is not enough activity going on to justify the investment.
Therefore, it all boils down to whether economic activity should spearhead infrastructure or whether it should be the other way round. Both the Gozitan community and the authorities are answerable for the deficit but more precious time would be wasted if we stopped there. Instead, we need to be creative and courageous enough to help Gozo take the plunge and catch up.
The environment can only benefit from the diversification of the Gozitan economy if the right policies are in place. We certainly need concrete policies on the use and re-use of empty properties. Such policies must be fair with the owners but must also stimulate them to find a fruitful use.
Examples of good policy are tax benefits for landlords and tenants to encourage leasing, and financial aid from the State where structural conversion is required. Efforts in this direction have so far been timid. It is high time that we get such policies up and running.
Of course, failure to act effectively will inevitably expose Gozo and its environment to an ever-growing threat, making the edges of the sword sharper and sharper. This is something we definitely cannot risk, because Gozo and its natural beauty are a legacy we received from our anscestors and which we owe to future Gozitans.
Gozitans of the future have the right not to inherit from us a ruined environment. I think all of us in the present generation agree that we would not want to be blamed for leaving behind such an environment.
kcutajar78@gmail.com
Kevin Cutajar is a PN candidate for Gozo.