A symposium on the theme ‘Maltese national heritage at risk’, organised by the History of Art and Fine Arts Students Association with the objective of raising awareness about the lack of cultural appreciation in Malta, highlighted a number of imaginative practical ideas for lifting heritage appreciation in Malta to a new level. If implemented, they could help save Malta’s architectural heritage from the current relentless attack of construction development.
Architectural historian Conrad Thake focused on those sites and buildings which have so far been neglected and kept out of the public eye as Malta has struggled to focus on major, long-neglected historic sites, such as Fort St Elmo and Fort St Angelo – now excellently restored thanks to EU funding.
He instanced the examples of the Cottonera Lines, which through a strategic plan had the potential to be restored and turned into a sustainable space for public enjoyment. He drew attention to Sans Souci in Marsaxlokk, and the long-neglected impressive forts at Ricasoli and Delimara. There are many other such former British forts – glorious both in their military architecture and their location – which have been scandalously neglected, many given away to party supporters as pig farms in the 1970s and 1980s.
All these could be restored and used for a range of purposes, not simply as historic sites to be visited. Good conservation and economic use of such sites are not incompatible objectives. What is needed is a holistic plan which brings together a strategy for safeguarding these historic sites.
The last 15 years since the introduction of new structures under the Cultural Heritage Act have focused on preserving and restoring Malta’s major heritage sites. It is now time to turn to the rest which are just as important to the overall impact of Malta’s rich cultural heritage and which, despite the best efforts of the heritage NGOs, have largely been overlooked.
The same symposium also produced a radical – for Malta – proposal by Andrew Narwold, who teaches economics at the University of San Diego, for the introduction of a property tax in Malta. This could provide an incentive to owners and would-be developers to preserve historic buildings and safeguard architectural heritage instead of destroying it.
His contention, based on experience in the United States, is that an appropriately targeted property tax would encourage re-use and restoration of existing historic buildings rather than the need for new developments. The current lack of a property tax in Malta meant that there was no cost for owners to hang on to empty properties. The trick lay in finding ways to encourage historic preservation and conservation “without being antagonistic to developers”.
There is undoubted merit in both these proposals. The real test is whether there is the political will and institutional structure to make them happen. The concept of a property tax has been ducked by successive governments. Any form of new tax is anathema to the electorate and a vote-loser. But if it were framed as a tax incentive it might stand a better chance of acceptance.
As to the focus on the regeneration of “lost heritage sites”, identifying an institutional body capable of taking the lead, drawing up a plan and implementing it is more challenging. Heritage Malta is the obvious candidate, but unless its human and budgetary resources are considerably increased it is difficult to see it being capable of achieving success. Malta’s heritage remains at risk. It needs imaginative solutions such as these to save it.