True Malta is not Amsterdam but it could be Sicily, or any equally hot or hilly city that has a successful bicycle transport system. Equally, one could say neither is it Dover. But while we justify building a tunnel, which some have said could cost the taxpayer €30 per trip and suggest building a €1.5 million environmentally-friendly cycle lane, reducing congestion and our waistlines, it is as if the world is falling on our heads.

I would agree totally with the Transport Minister’s suggestion that we cannot concentrate on one particular road user at the expense of others. But, then, is it not exactly what we have done for decades and is it not prioritising car use over active modes that have helped lead us to becoming an obese nation? Car-centric development is why we are in this transport pickle in the first place. So why brand people on bicycles as keyboard warriors when they are trying to help ease congestion?

Clearly, they are knowledgeable practitioners who do actually cycle to work. Compare that to the number of planners who do not cycle, much less to Transport Malta’s offices. If they did so they would find that the much-vaunted SMITHS (Sustainable Multi Intermodal Transport Hubs) project priority cycle lanes are neither actually direct, prioritise cyclists nor start and finish where they are supposed to.

Ok, I understand the Maltese do not do criticism, although the recent draft cycling strategy was profoundly deserving of it. But the suggestions of ride-to-work cyclists constructively point to how Ian Borg and his team can make cycling a success rather than a failure.

Most worryingly of all we seem to have a Transport Minister who does not really believe in induced demand. In 2019, that is about as useful as an environment minister who does not believe in climate change.