Five years ago, the then President, Guido de Marco, drew attention in no uncertain terms to the pathetic state of Fort St Elmo. There followed the usual political reaction as ministers rushed around like headless chickens to cover the government's tracks in the wake of the President's pointed remarks. The then newly-appointed Minister for Urban Development was tasked with leading the resuscitation of St Elmo and for a few weeks solutions and action appeared to be stirring. But this proved to be another false dawn for St Elmo.
Less than a fortnight ago, another de Marco, the Parliamentary Secretary for Tourism, drew attention to the disastrous state of the fort, which he described as a "national shame" requiring emergency intervention to stop the irreversible damage to this unique monument. Hard on his heels stepped Parliamentary Secretary for Land, Jason Azzopardi, who vowed that the days of squatters at St Elmo were numbered. So far, so welcome. But is political rhetoric, and the public outcry that it engenders, to be just that, yet again, or are we this time to see some real action?
Politicians on both sides of the political divide have been roundly castigated many times in the last decade for their neglect of Fort St Elmo. And of Fort St Angelo, that other equally significant monument to Malta's history and sacrifice in the shedding of Maltese blood. For St Angelo, too, is in a desperately neglected condition.
What do the current state of St Elmo and St Angelo tell us about ourselves as a people? What kind of people are we that can neglect our culture and history to this extent - for the sake of some €17 million - when we are prepared to spend more than this on promenades and other so-called "embellishment" projects? If the political will existed, there is no reason why St Elmo and St Angelo should today be in their current pitiable state.
What is to be done? First, the clean-up of Lower St Elmo, now under way, must be completed and then maintained. Secondly, as promised, all squatters, and their animals, must be removed.
In parallel, the re-location of those with so-called residual rights, such as the owners of carnival floats, should be planned and implemented. In the case of carnival float owners, they must be clearly told that after February 25, 2009 (the end of the next carnival) they are to go elsewhere. Where? This is the nub. Dr Azzopardi must now grasp this nettle.
If the political will exists, there is no reason why the clean-up, security and evacuation of St Elmo should not be completed by May 2009. The way will then be clear for the vital third step. This is to start the immense task of restoring it and then re-inhabiting the fort with organisations which can use it in a manner which is dignified and fitting for a monument of this historic importance. The need to re-inhabit Fort St Elmo is fundamental to its future conservation, resuscitation and use.
The current neglected, abused, shamed and shameful state of these two outstanding monuments to some of the greatest episodes in the history of our country needs to be reversed. Have we the political will to do so?