John Vassallo, former Ambassador of Malta to the EU, president of the Malta Business Bureau, member of the Council of Europa Nostra and strategic adviser to the Microsoft Corporation, speaks out about striking a balance between economic growth and environmental protection.

Going forward, it seems that this lurching forward haphazardly from one set of uncontrolled uglification to another is set to continue.

The current debate about the need to build upwards even higher and higher on the most cherished and beautiful coastal promontories and even in the dead centre of the island does not fit the Maltese way of life, does not fit the natural environment and does not use local materials, but will add enormous glass, steel and concrete monsters to the already growing number of glass buildings.

They will take light away from neighbours, lower the value of existing housing stock and pander to the needs of a small sliver of foreign investors, business leaders, tax residents and a few wealthy Maltese, and will plunge a stake of social divisiveness into Maltese society.

The prospective customers for this unprecedented race to the skies, among our few developers, are in Malta not for the sun, landscape or flats on the 20th or 30th floors of seafront skyscrapers. They are here because of tax, services and other regimes that offer them advantages they do not find in their countries. But similar regimes are also offered in other places. I think of two types of competing locations for regime seekers. The first category are the Dubais and the Singapores of this world, and the second are the Monacos, Genevas, Zurichs and Luxembourgs.

Which do the Maltese want to be like? The first are high-rise skyscraper conglomerations. The second are European low-to-middle height cities retaining local continuity and human-size structures. Prices per square metre are probably higher in Monaco and Zurich than in Dubai. Empty blocks are much fewer in Monaco and Geneva than in Dubai. Yet the tax or regime seekers, whether retirees or businessmen, flock to both types of places.

Thus, development does not preclude environmental sustainability. Prices are not set by the type of buildings offered, they are set by the attractiveness of the regimes and the attractiveness of the environment.

Rushing now, especially with the results of the US election and the uncertainty it will produce in the world, is foolish. Over-investing may be damaging to our economy

Then there is the local population to think of. What do the Maltese, who cannot afford these exceptionally high prices, want? How do they want the island to look for their children and grandchildren? What would happen should the regimes that attract these foreign investors to Malta change? What would happen should there be a slump in the economy, or restrictions imposed by the EU? What would happen should a score or two of these skyscrapers get built, and we face an economic downturn?

There is too much uncertainty to lurch forward haphazardly. We need a long-term plan that is put to the vote of the population, which is endorsed by experts, that is socially, economically and culturally sustainable, and that is outside the powers of any elected government to change without either two-thirds majority in Parliament or similar manacles.

John Vassallo

Our ‘criminal energy’ or greed should not be the driver of development, but simple protection of the existing environment is not the answer either. A balance must be struck.

Before finding this balance, before having the population express itself on a couple of alternative long-term plans for Malta and Gozo, I suggest a moratorium on all new construction, allowing only refurbishment and re-construction of the existing stock of buildings and monuments.

This will keep the labour force and cash flow of our construction industry going. This will also ensure that the ever-growing number of tourists who come to Malta for its weather, history and culture will not begin to decline because we are making Malta unrecognisable and unlivable.

For me, development that raises the standards of the existing stock of Maltese housing, whether town houses, social housing, flats built in the last 50 years or historical buildings, is more economically sound. We should put an end to damp walls, leaking roofs, asbestos, tanks on roofs, crowded families, draughty windows and doors and no heating systems – issues that are endemic to the living areas of most Maltese. Other countries have managed to improve this over the last 100 years of economic growth. We have not.

It is socially unacceptable.

Reconstruction and refurbishment retain the look and way of life that will continue to attract mass tourism. It will produce elegant and 21st century interiors with the platinum or BREAM certificate standards that will suit tax and regime hunters who wish to come here and are most welcome. The bread and butter of our businessmen and women and the jobs for the young generations will be found by serving the 450,000 Maltese and the two million tourists who visit us. The small number of wealthy or business folk will be equally attracted, whether we offer them skyscrapers or palazzi.

Lack of a long-term vision that is signed up to by all citizens and all parties so that the 50- to 100-year plan remains intact throughout the entire period will only promote a continuation of the haphazard development period of our history. Add to this our own national erratic decision-making powers and our criminal energy characteristic, and we are doomed to fail.

The current debate about the need to build upwards even higher and higher on the most cherished and beautiful coastal promontories and even in the dead centre of the island does not fit the Maltese way of life, and does not fit the natural environment.

Allowing only economic factors, profit and maximisation of land space to rule the decision-making is wrong and unsustainable.

The question to ask is whether we want to continue haphazardly and unsustainably, moving away from our natural building materials to glass, steel and concrete and rising upwards, under the argument that one limits the use of space by going upwards, must be first measured against the yardstick of what constitutes planned urban areas, healthy living and Maltese way of life and sustainability, not just profitability.

Rushing now, especially with the results of the US election and the uncertainty it will produce in the world, is foolish. Over-investing may be damaging to our economy. We should use the time until the dust settles and see how the EU will react. Will the EU regroup and strengthen its common institutions and act much more in integrated fashion, or will it also fall apart into populism?

Both scenarios can damage our regimes and attractiveness. If it becomes more unified, we can expect harmonisation of taxation and common rules for provision of services. If it falls apart, the result can be chaotic and investors will be more cautious. Both scenarios would temporarily slow down our present economic growth.

We need to plan and have a vision now, not next year. We need to stop all but restoration and upgrading work until then

When foreign investors come to Malta, they do not come because we present them with elegant, prestigious office spaces or living spaces. They come because the regimes in place allow them to do their business on the fringes but within the EU more profitably then elsewhere. They are more than welcome.

I contend that since they come for the regime, like they go to Dubai, Singapore, Monaco and Geneva for their regimes, then they are neutral to what there is on offer. Prices in Monaco at €30,000 per square metre are equal to those in Dubai. Malta can still choose to go low-rise or high-rise. Dubai should not be our model.

Our model should be the Malta that the Maltese want – the Malta that will still attract the normal tourist, our bread and butter, and not a Malta that attracts more of the inward investors who may be only as sustainable as the tax, legal and other regimes that keep them here.

The same applies to so-called modern retirees who buy flats they do not live in for more than a couple of weeks a year, bringing little value added to the local economy apart from their initial investment. They come for the tax benefit we offer, out of reach of their tax collectors. They also like what they see of the weather and cultural heritage.

As we all know, both the tax regime and the gaming regime are under scrutiny and potential attack by the EU. Whether we can keep them intact, tweak them or have to leave the EU to retain them will only be known in the next five to 10 years. They are being challenged, as are the regimes of Ireland, Luxembourg and now even Dubai and the Emirates – our colleagues and competitors.

Were these to change, the investors would leave in the blink of an eyelid – as quickly as they came. Hopefully, we could replace them with healthcare wealthy tourists, passport buyers and wealthy tax planning retirees, but that is neither secured nor certain. Thus we live in a pretty uncertain economic situation.

For this reason, I suggest that we take a time out – some breathing room to take a long look at ourselves as Maltese EU citizens who wish to continue to enjoy living on these God-blessed islands of ours.

A final consideration is pure sustainability. With 700,000 people crowding this island every day of the year, making us over 2,500 per square km with too many cars, too few roads and a very low standard of building stock in the towns, villages and residential centres of Malta, we have a very wealthy country but a very badly distributed quality of life.

We cannot build a silver or golden set of cages for the wealthy investor, his employees and a few wealthier Maltese, leaving the rest to live miserably. We must raise the quality of life of all Maltese so that we do not create a social divide that is already with us. For our businesses who import, provide services, build and sell, the local and tourist population is their bread and butter.

Therefore, high-value clientele is the icing on the cake. We need to raise the buying power and living conditions of our base home market and base touristic market that provides the major part of our  revenues before we cater for the elite niche.

We need to plan and have a vision now, not next year. We need to stop all but restoration and upgrading work until then.