The recent correspondence on the Transport Master Plan needs to be put into perspective.

Stanley Agius, Transport Malta’s media and communications manager, took traffic consultant Peter Biczók to task over his criticism of the National Transport Master Plan (The Sunday Times of Malta, January 15) as “a baseless attack” on the “first document in Malta transport’s policy history” to promote bicycle commuting.

But is it really baseless or simply lobbying? Firstly, let’s not forget that for someone from outside the country looking in, Malta must look like it is 20 years behind the times in transport reform. Particularly so when discussing alternative transport modes that have been largely ignored. The Transport Master Plan can’t possibly come soon enough in our view – it’s 20 years overdue!

Secondly, Transport Malta often fails to understand that lobbyists tend to lobby. That’s what they do. We are here to advocate bicycle commuting and yes, we would certainly like to see much more, just like other special interest groups will press for more of whatever they support. This is quite a natural reaction. We’ve seen plans like this come and go before, such as the ‘Plan for Cycle Routes on Malta and Gozo’, which was published almost 10 years ago.

So while the Bicycling Advocacy Group enthusiastically welcomes this paradigm shift, most people on bicycles faced with their daily commute are, at best, somewhat sceptical.

As such the Master Plan needs the strongest of political support to ensure robust policy changes that cannot be watered down. This is because when it comes to promoting urban bicycle commuting, we are all too well acquainted with the ‘do minimum’ scenario. The unintended outcome of this is to indirectly promote the unsustainability of car use at the expense of other road user groups, cyclists, pedestrians and bus users.

This might explain the frustration of people on bicycles, and even pedestrians. In the last year, we saw not one metre of urban cycling infrastructure. In fact, we lost far more than we gained. We have patiently waited a year for an answer on the proposal for a contraflow in Marsascala after the local council closed the cycle track, Malta’s only ‘urban’ cycling infrastructure, to facilitate parking.

Many quiet routes lost out to modifications for the Kappara project and two-way roads were turned into impassable one-way streets, with motorists desperately taking to quieter alternative routes used by cyclists that forced the latter back onto main roads. Again, a retrograde step. Equally, we are still waiting for a rescue plan for a disastrous policy on pedelecs that has reduced both uptake and sales for retailers.

It is true that in this urban game of snakes and ladders, these are specific problem areas which the Master Plan promises to address. But too many snakes may explain the scepticism and frustration of people attempting to commute by bicycle. The numbers simply won’t propagate until there is a fertile and importantly, safer and bike-efficient environment, for car drivers to take to two wheels.

In our view, the Master Plan may need a tweak here, a slight adjustment there (after all we are lobbyists), measures we are more than happy to collaborate on. But for the good of the country, the Master Plan as it is, warts and all, cannot really happen soon enough!