It is being said that a fixed link with Gozo will solve 90 per cent of its problems. This is an extremely facile statement because, while a bridge or tunnel will solve some problems, it will, however, cause other problems. What is really needed is an effective job-creation programme.
As inconvenient as the crossing is, does it justify the building of a bridge estimated to cost between €750 million and €1 billion? Consider that the Gateshead Millennium Bridge across the Tyne cost £22 million for just 126 metres while the Gozo channel measures 5.25 kilometres of coast riddled with deep faults and unstable clay.
A further €1 million will be required for annual maintenance. Furthermore, a bridge would not eliminate the worst winter crossings because it will have to be closed in high winds.
Given this massive cost and the fact that a good part of the Gozitan commuters’ long commute is actually caused by road congestion in Malta, it would make more sense to introduce a high-speed catamaran service from Gozo to Valletta and the south, linked to an efficient public transport network.
It has been estimated that any road link to Gozo will increase the number of cars crossing to Gozo from 1,500 a day to 2,700 in 2021, with the resultant increase in pollution and related cardio and respiratory diseases.
Increased traffic plus the current wave of development would make Gozo no different to any Maltese village, ruining the unique character and unspoilt beauty that form the core of its tourism policy.
Gozo presently attracts quality tourists, expatriate residents and Maltese seeking to get away from it all. Increasing day-tripper tourism would simply encourage the exodus that has already started towards other more untouched Mediterranean destinations.
Road access would mean that tourists need not overnight in Gozo, spelling ruin for hotels and restaurants on the sister island. Similarly, Gozitan businesses would suffer as Gozitans would prefer the wider selection on offer in Malta.
Therefore, the bridge intended to reduce commuting hardship for Gozitans could actually lead to increased unemployment in Gozo.
Politicians boast of EU monies obtained for Gozo, yet they don’t seem to realise that a permanent link to Gozo would deprive Gozo of all the ‘double insularity’ EU funding it presently benefits from.
Gozitan health and education facilities also risk being neglected once a bridge or tunnel is available. At the same time, it would not result in great savings because Gozo cannot do without a local major hospital for the prompt treatment of acute and emergency cases arising in Gozo itself.
The claim that a bridge would attract industry to Gozo is dubious given that Malta itself is struggling in that area. FAA has long maintained that Gozo needs a concerted drive to incentivise service industries to move there, benefitting from the highly qualified young Gozitan workforce.
Gozitan students need online University courses and professional training to reduce their commuting and Gozitans should be given priority boarding.
Finally, the bridge would have a permanent visual impact on our only archipelago landscape, which is also a protected Natura 2000 site. Such a project cannot be decided by a referendum but, according to EU rules, must be subjected to a strategic environment assessment followed by nationwide public consultation.
The shortcoming of the Chinese study is not only that it is being conducted by a party that has a vested interest in the bridge construction. It is also the fact that this study is being conducted in a vacuum, instead of being part of a holistic strategy for Gozo that researches social, economic and environmental impacts.
Instead of undermining Gozo’s tourism industry, the funds that would have been spent on a bridge or tunnel could be invested in job creation, health and education in Gozo. In Italy, it had been proposed to build a bridge across the three-kilometre channel to Sicily but it was found that the cost was unjustified even though it would have catered for hundreds of thousands of cars a day, unlike our maximum of 2,700.
The Gozo bridge project is being proposed when the rebuilding of the Ċirkewwa and Mġarr terminals costing millions of euros is not even complete, when Malta is facing excess deficit procedures and has not even started to solve serious problems such as water conservation and alternative energy obligations.
Spending €1 billion on a bridge to Gozo with all its negative implications for our landscapes, health and long-term economy in order to benefit the construction industry would be the essence of irresponsibility.
Astrid Vella is coordinator of Flimkien għal-Ambjent Aħjar.