It is welcome news that the Planning Authority board has refused to grant a permit for a large development in Wied Għomor valley. It is especially positive that the board listened to many residents and NGOs. The environmental lobby can easily slip into feeling that it is talking to the wall. Many of its concerns are routinely ignored.
The residents of Swieqi and San Ġwann have shown that persistence can reap results. The Planning Board showed that it can listen.
Unfortunately, thousands of people protesting last year against building an educational institute at Żonqor have not had the same effect on the government.
The Żonqor permit has not yet been granted by the Planning Board. Will it use the same yardstick as for Wied Għomor or will it sense that its hands are tied, particularly since the CEO’s office was directly involved in the site selection process?
The government has justified the choice of Żonqor because it is ‘not feasible’ to construct this educational institute elsewhere. This assumes that the natural landscape has less value.
The idea of a shady threesome of power at Castille – Muscat, Mizzi and Schembri – has actually been reinforced
The construction industry and the government treat the countryside as a ‘cheap’ option. True, it may be cheaper for the developer, but its actual value to society is not less than land in urban areas, and it is up to the government to recognise this and safeguard the interests of society as a whole.
If anything, the countryside is so reduced that it is more valuable than ever. In the long run, the real cost of losing the countryside is paid by society, by us and our children.
• In the post-war era, spy stories had plenty of material to work with. The Cold War provided a backdrop where plots involving spies and counter-espionage thrived.
The world’s most famous fictional spy, James Bond, emerged in that scenario, first presented in Ian Fleming’s novel Casino Royale in 1953.
John Le Carré’s best-selling stories were also set in the shadowy world of powerful and secretive intelligence agencies spying through the Iron Curtain. Part of the fun of the recent film Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, based on his novel, was capturing a mood of the 1970s.
Two demolished physical landmarks symbolise a dramatically changed political landscape. First, the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, followed by the collapse of the Twin Towers in 2001.
In today’s spy stories, the focus has shifted. The Middle East and the ‘war on terror’ are often centre-stage, as in the popular television series Homeland.
Post-war spy novels were not really about Communism or leftist ideologies. They focused on dictatorships, undemocratic regimes and rogue states, built on corruption, greed and lawlessness.
While Malta was building alliances with Libya, China and Korea in the 1970s and 1980s, widespread fear and dislike of totalitarian regimes flourished in Western Europe.
Once the Iron Curtain evaporated, Eastern European states were replaced as the main background for spy fiction. In the 1990s, Le Carré chose the murky underworld of Panama for his novel, The Tailor of Panama.
It is not hard to understand why Panama provided a suitable setting for shady dealings and a plot built on deceit, and I will not labour the point here. Unfortunately, Panama’s reputation is what it is.
When Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri opened companies in Panama, it was obvious that this would be perceived negatively by the public. The Prime Minister says he knew about these companies before they were revealed in the press.
Muscat has not explained why he did not request them to be closed immediately once he found out, before the pressure of public opinion set in. Did he think it was fine for a serving minister to acquire a shell company in Panama?
I have lost count of comments from people who understand financial services a lot better than I do, explaining that the obvious reason to have a shell company in Panama is to bury and hide assets in a dark hole.
In any case, Mizzi’s declared assets do not justify it. No apology can disguise this fact.
The Cabinet reshuffle has only made matters worse. The same minister suspected of hidden deals and agendas is now working without a portfolio.
In other words, he no longer has a clear job description. We do not know what Mizzi’s tasks and duties are, who he is talking to, what he is planning or expected to deliver.
Amid this huge scandal, which hinges on perceptions of hidden and dubious dealings, Mizzi is now officially the man in the shadows. Muscat’s reshuffle has not solved a fundamental, underlying political problem of Panamagate – secrecy. It has made it bigger.
The idea of a shady threesome of power at Castille – Muscat, Mizzi and Schembri – has actually been reinforced. Their penchant for deals with undemocratic countries lacking transparency, such as Azerbaijan and China, does not boost their image. It is worsened by their tendency to keep these visits and contracts under wraps.
When a reporter asked about Mizzi’s secret company in Panama in February, Muscat had ridiculed the word ‘secret’. He quipped: ‘Do you think this is James Bond?’.
No, it is not. The Panama Papers are reality not fiction. Secret companies, hidden deals and shady jurisdictions should have no place at Castille.
petracdingli@gmail.com