At a recent tourism seminar, which was concluded only a short while ago, it was concluded that five-star hotels are a no-go for Malta.

One of the participants said they are not viable for the Maltese islands, and that one should consider concentrating on one-, two- and three-star hotels, if we want to preserve a tourist market.

The top-notch tourists are keeping away and the majority of our tourists inevitably come from the working class, student fraternity and pensioner sectors. Though an opinion, this must surely not have gone down well with the local tourist market investors.

Some half dozen or more hotels are at present closed down, awaiting upgrading, and some, if not most, are also being upgraded to five-star costing millions of Maltese liri.

Indeed, the island in upheaval, looking more like an untidy workshop, with considerable chunks of tourist areas being taken up by new building projects of immense magnitude. Half finished and derelict structures that were once, or should have become multi-million projects, also occupy a considerable chunk of our cluttered island.

From information already made public, a number of operational five-star hotels, due to a "diminishing" quality market, have opted to bring down prices drastically, ignoring that by so doing they have practically pushed other three-star hoteliers out of the market.

If we were looking for up-market tourism, it seems that we still haven't got it, and our projections and marketing seem to be in limbo, with intentions revolving around half-baked, and most of the time, illusionary hopes and theories.

To make the jargon simple, when we speak of up-market services, we are talking about $1,000 to $10,000-a-night suites, demanding top-level formation and top class service from a specialised and accountable staff, trained in first-class catering schools and establishments around the world.

You cannot have a five-star service at Lm5 a day (bed and breakfast) accommodation and with part-time, half-trained and indispondent, service staff to booth. If we want up-class marketing and super yachts, we have to put our predictions and targets right the first time round. As any other economic enterprise, tourism suffers irreparably from miscalculations and misdirected investments. The disastrous consequences become obvious to all in due time.

Someone, somewhere (an authority, union or Ministry) must set limits as to what can be constructed, when it can be constructed and how many should or should not be built. Someone needs to put up a stop sign within the tourist market, that may well have reached its saturation point. Definitely our ecological equilibrium has bypassed that mark a long time ago!

Time and space

On two separate occasions, Tourism Minister Francis Zammit Dimech said that the local tourism market had reached its saturation point, with the quota of hotel beds over what the local market actually needs.

This should mean that Malta at present has an average of 20 to 30 hotels more than it needs. What this means is that competition is being stretched to the limits and that we are going to see numerous derelict and abandoned sites! But this is not the end of the story for we still find new sites and developments, with hundreds of beds, being developed.

This is the concept of free trade put into practice, but what about those neglected sites added to the hundreds of already derelict or uninhabited buildings around?

We are practically filling all the empty (agricultural and ecological) spaces without much thought and consideration. If we take a good look around, we sometimes wonder why tourists come to Malta; to see endless high-rise and shapeless concrete blocks so similar to the British "council houses". Most sites are so high that their shadow covers a good portion of coastline that was exclusively reserved for sunbathing. Was that the primary reason why they were originally built there! What do tourists really see?

Our neighbours the Europeans are more discerning than we think. Sunday morning documentaries on Italian television are dedicated to country living, with its simple traditions - cuisine, curiosities, history and archaeology. These are on prime time because they are well followed.

Is it possible that while building our five-star hotels we are concentrating too much on beer festivals, discos, and beach parties that do draw crowds but not the best quality tourist. Is there any real practical commercial philosophy behind what we do and how we invest, or is it simply hip?

Turning to another issue, are we going to lose another part of our heritage and history, even if it is modern and 20th century? News of Mistra Village's sale for a considerable amount of money was recently in the press.

One wonders if it is the last we will hear of this site? The word is out that this unique and world-acclaimed "jewel of mid-20th century Maltese architecture" will eventually be demolished to make space for more hotel beds.

Built during the Seventies, Mistra Village and its later developments, followed a master plan which remained faithful to the original - that of interpreting the Maltese landscape as a "typical" Maltese village core.

Wooden balconies and bright Maltese limestone of the finest quality and workmanship draw the attention of even the most distracted viewer. The project was a success in making a traditional and heritage feature; the village, a tourist venue.

Foreign and local journalists lament about the "box type of accommodations" that are on offer, fruit of a superficial and utilitarian architectural stereotype inherited from the Sixties. Unfortunately, most new buildings follow the same philosophy.

Word is going round that part of the premises are to be demolished, as early as the end of this year, possibly to be replaced by 'anonymous' type of apartment buildings.

Indeed, a development permit dating to 2001 does indicate the intent to demolish the existing Dura Block, comprising 42 bedrooms, to construct l02 hotel-type bedrooms, with an underground parking and restaurant/reception extention. The recommended decision is that of granting permits.

A board decision posted on the MEPA Website says "Grant Permission". Meanwhile, other MEPA officials state categorically that this was not the case; permission was never granted.

Conservation and preservation of this site must be taken seriously into consideration. Aesthetically, it is practically the only surviving pleasing site surviving from the latter part of 20th century Maltese architecture worth protecting. A typical Maltese village core, with outstanding uniformity and simplicity, will be sacrificed to make way for more accommodation.

If apartment blocks are to be built at Mistra, then underground parking space must be provided. This brings us to another issue related to Mistra Village. Mistra is honeycombed with passages and tunnels, some of which lie only metres beneath the very site.

Some of these sites, like the Roman Baths, discovered only three years ago, are immediately close to the property. On the other hand, one of the last surviving British period grain store and underground mill in Malta is located squarely underneath Mistra Village.

These grain silos and mills are (or at least should be) protected as national monuments, and ultimately be opened to the general public. In a more realistic scenario, these silos and still functioning mills might turn up handy or even necessary during a future calamity.

Hewing out a similar underground complex would cost the Maltese taxpayer hundreds of thousands of Maltese liri, when the time will come to make use of them again.

Theoretically, Maltese legislation protects these underground structures, together with war shelters and communications and storage centres, so that in time of need (war/natural disasters) government would have immediate access to them.

Unfortunately, things are not going as they should and, as has happened all too often, we see many of these underground sites being destroyed through negligence, ignorance and intentional destruction.

So with one stroke of a pen we lose two unique and irreplaceable treasures of our local architecture and history. Does this make sense? For sure, the present Preservation (Conservation) Law stipulating that a site worth preserving must be outside an 80-year timeframe, is outdated and fraut to irregularities; many Knights' period and medieval sites damaged during the war, are being passed for 20th century reconstructions, and thus not old enough for preservation.

Other criteria must be looked into. Definitely there are already a number of sites spanning the last few decades that merit being preserved, for aesthetic beauty, uniqueness and function. Mistra Village and the grain silo and mill site merit just that.