For those of you who have read Alessandro Baricco’s series of essays ‘The Barbarians’, published in 2006 in La Repubblica, the transformation of Malta, first in the 1970s under Dom Mintoff and Lorry Sant, and now in 2013-2018 under Sandro Chetcuti and Joseph Muscat, seem to follow the script of that Italian philosopher to the letter.

The title chosen by Baricco may be misleading since it is not meant as disparaging. His essays describe how easily manipulated leaders, and masses behind them, follow trends of change for change’s sake, in the name of modernisation.

I look to that author for inspiration since I have a very positive attitude towards innovation, modernisation and technology, having spent my entire business, political and lobbying career spanning nearly 50 years working for change, modernisation and improvement of my country, my businesses, my clients and the environment in general, not just here in Malta.

Yet I see more and more commentators around me, people with experience and love of beauty, care for the environment and social understanding, falling head over heels into the false mantra that change is inevitable and that those who argue otherwise are flat earthers.

I cannot disagree more.

Automation, innovation in all technical matters, social engineering and widening of human rights to all sectors of society are all welcome changes. However, these same changes need not automatically produce change where such change is not necessary, or where such change is destructive of assets or of culture, or where it is solely led by lucre and greed of the few able to make these changes.

Let me take us back to the 70s and 80s under Mintoff and Sant when the part of Malta I know best, the famous Sliema seafront with its 244 Jugend, art nouveau and classical villas, all with gardens, sea views and fantastic interiors, when seen together as an ensemble should have been saved (which should have been obvious to architects with an eye to asset value and protection of cultural heritage for future generations).

They should not only have been saved but put into a masterplan in a Le Corbusier-inspired project under which the front line by the sea would have been declared untouchable at two storeys and all streets behind allowed to add one storey more than the building in front until the top of the hill has six to eight storeys. Same again on the other side of the hill descending towards the Ferries and Gżira, with only two storeys allowed on the seafront. Those lovely houses with front gardens along the Strand and the town houses leading to Ta’ Xbiex would have created a magnificent appearance.

If we continue on this path there will be next to nothing left of the Maltese character, culture and maybe even language in 20 years’ time

Instead, politicians granted permits against bribes, followed by blind and avaricious architects who, instead of pointing out the obvious, failed to fight for our culture. They were aided and abetted by the owners of the 244 magnificent houses, palaces and villas by the sea, families with enough capital and greed to bring in a barbarian army of demolition and cement companies.

These three forces destroyed this gem, just like the barbarians destroyed Rome. Instead of a jewel of art nouveau architecture in maritime Europe, the envy of all and a reason to come to Malta – just like the Caravaggios at St John’s or the fortifications of our cities – they created the horrible eight and now 12-storey monsters that line the seafront.

Not only are they ugly but they also take the light away from the three or four streets behind them, forcing the destruction of long lines of Sliema secondary road townhouses with the architecture balneaire of Windsor Terrace, Howard Street, Amery, Depiro and Blanche streets, to name a few, in order to seek light and some value for their owners.

During this period some interesting and well-integrated developments took place, such as Santa Marija Estate in Mellieħa and the Hilton area development. Then, in the 90s and early 00s, especially with economic slowdown, came a period of pause when the only destruction was that being caused by the mushrooming of ugly one two- and three-star hotels and flatsijiet in selected areas like Buġibba, Qawra, Marsaxlokk and Xlendi.

In the last 10 years we have had a second wave of Barbarian invasions, with the same culprits: politicians, architects, developers and financiers, even many of the same surnames as in the 70s, who have not learned one iota from their predecessors. This time it is all towns and villages across Malta that are being targeted.

If we continue on this path there will be next to nothing left of the Maltese character, culture and maybe even language in 20 years’ time.

I am very much in favour of innovation, of changes to our national economic model, bringing in AI, the Internet of Things, blockchain and modern businesses to locate here. Yet I believe this can be done while retaining, nay, while strengthening, the local infrastructure, the local low skylines, and while saving most of the existing countryside and regenerating local farming.

This can be done through strong and enforced regulation. If we oblige a height restriction of two or maximum three floors from now on, more or less like Washington DC did 100 years ago, we will still have what looks like ‘old’ traditional Malta on the outside. The insides of houses would naturally have to be modernised and refurbished to bring in the mod cons that 21st century folk expect.

By restricting height, we restrict volume, thus increasing the value of property by creating lower supply. Modern buildings can be beautiful too, but they just do not fit in with Malta’s uniqueness. Making it a new Dubai is pure barbarism. Dubai is OK because the old town has been retained and the new cities have been built on what was previously desert. Here there is no room to retain the old and still build the new. Moreover, the new clashed with the old, destroying its uniqueness.

If we add a numerus clausus for tourism numbers and restrict rentals to 30 days per year per residence, we would once again control supply and, having improved the natural and traditional beauty of Malta by the first action above, the price of coming to this unique place as a visitor would naturally go up. Many would be deterred but many others would be prepared to pay more for their trip and accommodation. Higher prices with fewer jobs should mean higher wages since there would be need for better educated staff. One spin-off would be better restaurants.

Thirdly, we should improve the infrastructure across the island and solve the traffic and emissions issues. There are many ideas on how to do this. Mine would be to introduce a moratorium on fuel-driven vehicles by a certain date, say 2025, obliging only electric vehicles and classic cars to be on to our roads. This would reduce noise and emissions but would unfortunately not solve gridlock.

Fourthly we must introduce discipline, obedience and enforcement of all regulations, whether in financial services supervision, land and building permits, environmental protection, traffic, construction, employment or taxation. A tightly controlled and boring, yes, a boring place to live in, is safer, cleaner and healthier than what we are experiencing today and what we will experience tomorrow if we fall into the trap of unstoppable change, into the trap of thinking we will only have wealth if we allow so-called development. I certainly do not share that philosophy or economic model.

If we have the courage to embrace modernity but simultaneously retain the exterior cultural, architectural, social, linguistic and natural assets that we have, and say no to the Barbarians as defined by Baricco, then we really would make a name for ourselves, we would be richer and safer, happier and healthier and more civilised.

This is a Times of Malta print opinion piece