Forgive me for beginning with a blinding statement of the obvious. But it is necessary to do so if we are to focus objectively on what is happening to Malta’s environment.
The “environment” consists of our physical surroundings. We experience this through the air we breathe, the water we drink, the land space we inhabit (including the natural landscape and built cultural heritage), the noise to which we are subjected, the state of the sea around us, and the species, nature and biodiversity that coexist with us.
The state of the environment makes a significant contribution to the quality of life of every person. In Malta – one of the most densely populated countries in the world – the impact is even greater.
The protection of the environment is no less critical to the competitiveness and sustainability of the Maltese economy and social development than that of any other country. Indeed, the consequences of environmental neglect are economically short-sighted since they affect the productive capacity of an economy highly dependent on tourism.
Sustainable economic development cries out for a fine balance between economic resources and the environment. Economic growth on its own, without environmental sustainability and social progress, is not progress. For there to be real progress economic output must enable individuals in society to improve the quality of their lives without eroding the things people value, such as Malta’s unique natural landscapes, its historic sites, traditional vernacular buildings and the marine and coastal areas.
Regular surveys of Maltese concerns carried out by MaltaToday demonstrate clearly the public’s anger, disquiet and foreboding about the environment. The findings in the recent survey on “traffic”, “construction development”, “environmental destruction” and the “current state of roads” – major indicators of any survey of the environment – amount to almost half of people’s worries.
A massive 41.6 per cent are concerned about the environment, compared to 15.5 per cent on “foreigners/immigrants living in Malta” and just 10.4 per cent on “corruption”.
Over-development and land abuse, the progressive deterioration of conservation areas and village cores and the creeping urbanisation of Gozo degrade every aspect of the Maltese quality of life.
The shabby state of our islands, scarred by litter and dumps, poor air quality, noise pollution, the threat to our fresh water, inland coastal waters and marine environment, the pressures on our remaining biological diversity and the impact of excessive transport and inordinate waste disposal add up to a country running a huge environmental deficit.
One of Malta’s leading NGOs, Din l-Art Ħelwa (of which I am honorary life council member) has identified five steps to be taken if there is to be a fundamental rebalancing of priorities for a better Maltese quality of life.
The first is the need for the urgent introduction of detailed local plans for all areas of Malta and Gozo. These have been under review since the approval of the Strategic Plan for the Environment and Development in 2015. Without the introduction of local plans – reflecting the countrywide policies set out in the strategic plan – the rapid rate of construction development will carry on apace in an uncontrolled manner leaving in its wake an ugly and overbuilt concrete jungle. It has already happened in Sliema, St Julian’s and its environs, Qawra, Buġibba and St Paul’s Bay.
Malta’s Rural Policy can now be seen as a pretext for promoting new construction development in the countryside
Second, Malta’s Rural Policy, which was published in 2014 – ostensibly as a stimulus for the regeneration of the Maltese countryside – can now be seen as a pretext for promoting new construction development in the countryside by replacing current structures, increasing existing “footprints” and “sanctioning” past illegalities.
The unique, traditional old structures that lend our countryside its rugged beauty are being lost. The policy should be revised to ensure these rural buildings are adopted to modern use and preserved for posterity, not demolished.
Third, Malta’s Water Management Plan, as promised in the government’s electoral manifesto, must be protected. Safeguarding Malta’s water table, already under huge pressure as a result of climate change, over-extraction and nitrate pollution, is essential if desertification is to be averted and loss of Malta’s remaining rural landscape averted.
Fourth, the scheduling of Malta’s and Gozo’s traditional, historic vernacular architecture must be speeded up to ensure that the relentless march of construction development, especially within already scheduled Urban Conservation Areas – where utmost protection is supposed to be given – is halted.
Last week’s excellent “Our Legacy” declaration to safeguard our patrimony should be essential reading for every Maltese member of Parliament.
Fifth – but certainly not last – there must be a proper re-examination of the so-called “Floor Area Ratio Policy” for the construction of high-rise buildings in Malta. In a country which is only 27 kilometres long and 14.5 kilometres wide, high-rise buildings affect everybody and every aspect of Malta’s built environment.
The current case-by-case consideration of such applications is leading to a back-door high-rise building frenzy by rapacious developers. What is urgently needed is a “skyline policy” that prevents high-rise buildings anywhere within, say, a two-kilometre distance of Malta’s remaining historic architectural landscapes of the Grand Harbour area and Mdina, and Victoria in Gozo. In writing this, I realise this restriction has already been breached in Sliema, but that is not an argument against drawing a firm line now.
The situation is dire. In its attitude to the environment, this government is little different from those that have come before it, except in the bags full of spare cash looking for a secure financial investment and its willingness to accommodate it.
Already the leader of the Opposition – party heir to the wanton and reckless expansion of the development zones in 2006 – has conceded he would not reject financial donations from those hoping to build high-rise structures in Malta. He has already tipped the wink to developers that he is open for business.
What I have written today is not new. Neither are the proposals made original. But they comprise the basic policy building blocks for turning back the current construction frenzy to a more manageable level. Those who care about the environment must press for their urgent adoption.
As a recent Times of Malta editorial put it: “the defects, deficiencies and downright destruction” being perpetrated on Malta’s environment by an unthinking government and pusillanimous “regulators” must cease.