Brian Decelis: aħdar ta’ veru

Brian hu persuna mimlija enerġija. Hu dedikat. Jiffoka l-enerġija tiegħu b’mod kreattiv favur dak li jemmen fih.

Għandu viżjoni ħadra. Hu aħdar ta’ veru.

Segwejtu mill-bogħod snin twal ilu waqt l-ewwel kampanja elettorali għall-Kunsilli Lokali fl-1992. Dakinnhar kien ġie elett fil-lokalità tal-Fgura għan-nom ta’ Alternattiva Demokratika.

Għaddew 32 sena, u għalkemm bħali,  b’inqas xagħar, għadu mimli bl-istess ħeġġa u determinazzjoni li fejn hu possibli jmidd għonqu għall-ħidma biex jagħmel id-differenza.

Dan hu l-impenn politiku tagħna, li bil-viżjoni ħadra tagħna nagħmlu differenza fil-ħajja tal-oħrajn, biex ħajjithom tkun aħjar.

Hemm ħafna xi jsir fuq livell ta’ lokalità. F’kull lokalità hemm ħtieġa ta’ Kunsill Lokali magħmul min-nies li kapaċi jkunu proattivi.

Tul dawn l-aħħar snin, kelli l-opportunità li naħdem mill-viċin ma’ Brian. Miegħu kelli l-opportunità li niddiskuti u nfassal il-ħidma tal-partit f’ċirkustanzi differenti.  Fi Brian dejjem sibt persuna li kienet kapaċi tittraduċi l-ftit kliem tiegħi (kultant anke espress b’mod telegrafiku) f’ħidma effettiva.

Fl-elezzjoni ġenerali li għaddiet, jekk Ralph (Segretarju Ġenerali tal-Partit) kien l-id il-leminija tiegħi, Brian, bla ebda dubju kien l-id ix-xellugija tiegħi, biex, flimkien mal-kumplament tat-tim organizzajna l-partit aħjar u bil-ftit riżorsi li kellna irnexxielna kważi nirduppjaw il-voti li ksibna minn elezzjoni ġenerali għall-oħra.

L-isfidi fil-lokalità mhumiex wisq differenti. L-issues li irridu niffaċċjaw huma kemm dawk ambjentali kif ukoll dawk ta’ governanza tajba. 

Brian għandu għarfien tajjeb ta’ dak li hemm lest għalih, meta, xahar ieħor nawguralu li jkun elett. Hu kapaċi jkun leħen taż-żgħir, tal-vulnerabbli, tar-resident abbandunat mill-awtoritajiet.

Ix-xahar id-dieħel, bi Brian elett bħala kunsillier, Marsaskala jkollha biex jirrappreżentha persuna determinata li tiddefendi liż-żgħir.  Meta nassiguraw li jkun imħares l-iċken wieħed fostna, għandna l-garanzija li nkunu qed inħarsu lil kulħadd. Brian hu l-bniedem li xahar ieħor jagħmel id-differenza.

Awguri Brian.

(diskors f’Marsaskala, Il-Ħadd 12 ta’ Mejju 2024)

The Hospital scam: collusion from day one

Around seven months ago, the Court of Appeal, presided by Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti, had concluded that the hospitals’ deal appeared fraudulent. While the original court decision had blamed Vitals/Stewards for this fraudulent deal, the Court of Appeal went one step further. Confirming the cancellation of the contracts, the Court of Appeal stated that it believed there was collusion between Vitals/Stewards and senior government officials or its agencies.

Collusion signifies secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy to deceive others. This is the certification the Court of Appeal delivered after examining the government’s handling of the hospital privatisation process.

Faced with such a certification any democratic government would have immediately shouldered political responsibility and we would have had resignations on a large scale, in government and in the wider civil service. Not in Malta. Except for the government’s taking over the direct control of the hospitals, it was as if practically nothing had ever happened.

This is the background to last week’s conclusion of the magisterial inquiry into the hospitals’ privatisation deal. While the Court of Appeal had concluded that senior government officials were complicit in the privatisation fraud, the magisterial inquiry is expected to identify who did which part of the dirty job. This is presumably the reason for the long list of persons who have been identified by the magisterial inquiry to answer for their actions.

Some readers will undoubtedly remember that, way back in October 2014, the Labour government had secretly signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with potential investors who were interested in “investing” in the Maltese health system. This had been revealed in one of the Auditor General’s reports investigating the hospital scam. The information that these same investors had in hand as a result of this MoU was subsequently utilised when six months later a public call for expression of interest was issued for the privatisation of the hospitals. It gave them an unfair advantage over all others who were interested.

What followed were various manoeuvres as a result of which the Maltese government representatives were “convinced” that they had a good deal in selecting Vitals Global Health Care to take over the running of the hospitals.

As a result, we have had detailed investigations by the National Audit Office and the magisterial inquiry which was triggered by NGO Repubblika.

Subsequent to the conclusion of the magisterial inquiry the first names of those to be accused of wrongdoing have been published. We have holders of political office, senior government officials, professionals in private practice, and persons in positions of trust all of whom are being accused of having a finger in the pie through fraudulent action, corruption and money laundering. At the time of writing, the details are not yet known as the legal jargon in which the criminal charges are framed is too general and wide-embracing.

Should matters have arrived at this point?

It has taken almost ten years for this fraudulent exercise to be uncovered and brought under control. Yet, had the institutions functioned properly it should have been nipped in the bud and never even happened. What was the role of the civil service in the creation of this mess? The presence of three Permanent Secretaries (and other civil servants) among those facing criminal charges indicates that the inquiring magistrate may have possibly identified an answer to this question.

Prime Minister Robert Abela has, in the past days, shed many crocodile tears in expressing support for a number of those facing criminal charges. He has also single-handedly contributed to the creation of an atmosphere of distrust in our judiciary. He should know better than that. Robert Abela should immediately desist from further undermining confidence in the courts and, from endangering the rule of law in our country.

The judiciary should be able to carry out its work without pressure and intimidation so that justice can run its course. Having already been at the receiving end of the impacts of grey-listing, Malta cannot risk further reputational damage as a result of Robert Abela’s hysterical outbursts.

published on the Malta Independent on Sunday : 12 May 2024

Riżenja hi triq tal-irġulija

Ir-riżenja tat-Tabib Chris Fearne mill-Kabinett tfisser li fil-Partit Laburista għad baqa’ min għandu sinsla. Din ir-riżenja hi pass tajjeb. Hi pass fl-interess tas-sewwa u tal-kontabilità.

Chris Fearne għamel tajjeb li irreżenja meta huwa iffaċċjat b’akkużi kriminali anke jekk għadu ma jafx eżattament fuq xiex huma ibbażati.

Għax ir-riżenji fil-politika Maltija huma xi ħaġa rari, ir-riżenja ta’ Fearne hi ta’eżempju għal kull politiku dwar kif jista’ jerfa’r-responsabbiltà politika li jrid iġorr f’kull ħin.

Ir-riżenja ma tfissirx ammissjoni. Tfisser irġulija. Tfisser dikjarazzjoni li Fearne hu politiku responsabbli li lest bil-fatti jpoġġi l-interessi tal-pajjiż qabel dawk tiegħu u tal-partit.

Ir-riżenja hi it-triq tal-politiku ġenwin li qiegħed hemm biex iservi u mhux biex jisserva.

Wara l-eżempju ta’ Chris Fearne, issa jmiss iktar riżenji, fuq quddiem dik ta’ Edward Scicluna minn Gvernatur tal-Bank Ċentrali.

Isa, Edward, ftit kuraġġ.

Ma hemmx biex nieħdu pjaċir

Ma hemm xejn li bih nistgħu nieħu pjaċir meta dawk fit-tmexxija jiġu mixlija b’korruzzjoni, frodi u ħasil ta’ flus. Dan għal diversi raġunijiet.

L-ewwel nett, minħabba li dawn in-nuqqasijiet, jekk seħħu, jfisser li dawk l-istituzzjonijiet imwaqqfa biex jipproteġuna ma ħadmux. Dan hu inkwetanti ħafna. Din mhiex xi ħaġa li ma nafux. Mhiex xi ħaġa ġdida. Ma ġratx illum. Ilha tiġri is-snin. Hemm responsabbiltà politika x’tinġarr għal dan il-fatt. Responsabbiltà li hi mifruxa tul is-snin u fuq diversi persuni li kellhom is-setgħa u għażlu li jħallu t-toqob minn fejn jgħaddu l-ġrieden.

It-tieni punt ta’ importanza hu li mhux billi hemm persuni li ser jiġu mixlija. Mhux bilfors li jinstabu ħatja. Jista’ jkun li l-provi ma jkunux ċari, inkellha li joħorġu fatti li sal-lum mhumiex magħrufa u li jispiċċaw idgħajfu l-provi.

It-tielet punt hu li jista’ jkun hemm żbalji tekniċi fil-mod kif jiżviluppaw il-proċeduri kriminali. Kemm żbalji ġenwini inkella żbalji intenzjonati!

Li t-tmexxija tal-pajjiż, tal-bieraħ u tal-lum, tkun mixlija bi ħmieġ ma jfissirx li huma ħatja, għalissa. Irridu nistennew biex inkunu nafu eżattament x’ġara.

Fl-aħħarnett dak li qed jiġri jħammeġ lill-pajjiż kollu, mhux biss lil dawk li qed jiġu akkużati. Għalhekk, ma hemmx biex nieħdu pjaċir.

From business-friendly to people-friendly

Public land is being continuously taken over for tables and chairs as an outdoor extension of restaurants and cafeterias. It is a land grab and has been going on for years. This land grab has intensified after the outbreak of COVID-19, primarily in response to the then restrictions on the permissible indoor numbers of customers allowed within catering establishments.

The most obvious examples of this land grab are in places like Sliema, Marsaskala, St Paul’s Bay, and Valletta. This land grab, however, is taking place all over the island, in practically all localities.

There are instances, such as in the case of squares, pedestrianized streets, and other large open spaces, where the placing of chairs and tables does not bother anyone. In these instances, complaints are rare, except when excessive noise is generated, particularly in the silent hours. In these cases, the use of public spaces for the placing of tables and chairs can be justified, provided that the space taken up for such use is reasonable and respects the rights of both the public as well as the residential communities.

The ever-increasing complaints are in respect of those instances where pavements are practically completely taken over by the placing of tables and chairs such that pedestrians, obstructed from using the pavement end up having to share the road with moving traffic, at considerable risk to themselves. It gets worse in the case of wheelchair users and their carers, as well as in the case of parents with children, particularly those still in prams.

In residential areas, that is in those instances where there are a number of residential units above ground-floor commercial establishments, the placing of tables and chairs on the pavement also restricts residents’ access to their homes. There is the added issue, encountered in many cases, of difficulty in accessing residential units when making deliveries of large objects, such as furniture and white goods. The land grab makes access in these instances practically impossible.  Access would be even worse in case of emergencies. I have not heard a whimper from the civil protection authorities on the matter.

As emphasised in the ADPD 2022 Electoral Manifesto, we want our pavements back. The use of pavements should revert to their intended use. Pedestrians should always have priority. It is about time that public authorities shift their emphasis from being business-friendly to people-friendly.  The needs of residents and pedestrians should take precedence over the interests of business! The pavement is, after all, not meant for tables and chairs but to facilitate the mobility of people such that they are safe from traffic.

This would entail that planning applications for placing tables and chairs in open areas are vetted properly, such vetting being based on the real impacts on both the residential community and pedestrians. It would also mean that continuous monitoring is carried out to ensure that the permit limitations are observed.

Just a little bit of effort in enforcement would make quite a significant difference. Unfortunately, enforcement is practically nonexistent. This lack of enforcement is the driving force that motivates those abusing the system to ride roughshod over the rights of residents and pedestrians. They know that most probably their abuse will be ignored as it has been for ages. This has always been interpreted that the state does not care at all.

During the local elections next month, this issue is a matter of considerable importance to residents. It is a campaign issue that is continuously brought up in discussions with voters.

The Marsascala ADPD candidate Brian Decelis has been campaigning on the matter for some time. This week he was confronted by one of the operators who is obstructing pavements at Marsaskala. He was even threatened. A police report has been submitted on the incident and it is hoped that swift action will be taken by the police authorities.

This mess should be addressed, all over the islands, the soonest.

Local Councils should be at the front line in ensuring that the authorities act such that permits issued for the placing of tables and chairs outside commercial establishments are people-friendly and that abusive operators are brought to order the soonest.  Electing local councilors sensitive to the matter would make a substantial difference.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 5 May 2024

Dawk it-78 boxfile

Robert Abela qiegħed jipprova jkeskes lin-nies kontra l-Qrati. Spiċċa issa dak li kien jgħid biex “inħallu lill-istituzzjonijiet jaħdmu.”

L-inkjesti dejjem idumu. Dawk ta’ importanza u serjetà kbira jdumu iktar. Li kien ikun ħażin kien kieku l-inkjesta tagħmel żmien wieqfa. Sakemm iż-żmien intuża biex tinġabar l-informazzjoni neċessarja biex tkun ippreservata ix-xhieda dwar dak kollu li ġara in konnessjoni mat-trasferiment tat-tlett sptarijiet lil Vitals, ikun hemm spjegazzzjoni raġjonevoli għad-dewmien.

L-ispjegazzjoni ikun possibli li nkunu nafuha meta dak li ikkonkludiet l-inkjesta jkun magħruf. S’issa, kif jiġri dejjem, xejn għadu mhu magħruf. Tal-inqas jiena u (probabbilment) inti li qed taqra ma nafu xejn!

Inutli nispekulaw, għax fiċ-ċirkustanzi l-ispekulazzjoni ħażin tagħmel. Ħażin lil kulħadd, peró l-ikbar ħsara issir lill-pajjiż. Dan Robert Abela jafu: imma minkejja dan jibqa’ jkeskes.

Ma tistax tkun kredibbli meta b’nifs wieħed tappella biex ħadd ma jirreaġixxi għall-provokazzjoni, imma immedjatament wara issaħħan l-irjus.

Robert Abela għamel tajjeb li talab biex l-Avukat Ġenerali (l-AG) tippubblika r-rapport tal-inkjesta. Kull miżura li tista’ tnaqqas l-ispekukazzjoni hi miżura tajba. Id-deċiżjoni, imma, tiddependi mill-AG biss, li nifhem li tiddeċiedi skond kif inhu l-aħjar biex issir ġustizzja, imma, anke b’mod li ma tippreġudikax l-istess ġustizzja.

Għalhekk xejn ma neħodha bi kbira jekk ir-riżultat tal-inkjesta jdum ma jkun ippubblikat.

Bħalissa, avukati fl-uffiċċju tal-AG ikunu qed jeżaminaw il-konklużjonijiet li waslet għalihom il-Maġistrat Gabriella Vella fir-rapport tal-inkjesta, u dan flimkien max-xhieda u l-provi li ġabret u li qegħdin merfugħha f’dawk it-78 boxfile.

Jekk l-inkjesta, biex ġiet konkluża, ħadet 4 snin u nofs, ħadd m’għandu jistenna li l-AG u l-Pulizija jieħdu deċiżjonijiet ta’ malajr.

L-unika ħaġa li nafu s’issa hu li l-AG talbet lill-Qorti biex ikunu iffrizati l-assi ta’ numru ta’ persuni u kumpaniji: hemm 84 (erbgħa u tmenin) isem. Il-Qorti ippreseduta mill-Imħallef Edwina Grima laqgħet it-talba. Dan ifisser li l-AG pass pass bdiet taġixxi.

Il-bieraħ waqt konferenza stampa l-ex Prim Ministru Joseph Muscat qalilna li hu dejjem mexa tajjeb. Jaf, qal, x’għamel u x’ magħmilx! Ovvjament jiena ma nafx x’għamel u x’magħmilx Joseph Muscat. Biex il-maġistrat saret taf x’għamel hu u x’għamlu l-oħrajn li ser jissemmew damet 4 snin u nofs tfittex u issaqsi.

Kulħadd jieħu pjaċir kieku t-tmexxija tal-pajjiż hi nadifa tazza. Biex ikun ivverifikat jekk dan hux minnu hemm il-Pulizija u l-Qrati. Għalhekk l-inkjesta, għalhekk it-78 boxfile.

Imma naħseb li lkoll saqajna mal-art u nafu li mhux kollox hu sewwa. Hemm min donnu diġa nesa’li diġa’ hemm sentenza tal-Qorti, ikkonfermata fl-appell, li fil-kaz tal-isptarijiet hemm ħafna x’ixxomm.

Min hu responsabbli għal dak li ġara? Joseph jgħid li mhux hu. It-83 l-oħra huma siekta s’issa.

Issa naraw jekk hux il-ħajbu.

Regulating the building industry

Regulating the building industry requires the political will to act in an industry that has repeatedly opposed and defied regulation. Last week’s fatal accident at St Ignatius Junction Sliema is the latest incident in an industry in which regulation is still opposed. The political will to regulate is lacking, notwithstanding all the government theatrics, day in day out.

The Chief Executive Officer of the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) has submitted his resignation on Tuesday. This will lead to the appointment of a third CEO in as many years. This is a resignation that has been submitted out of frustration, even though the resignation letter has not been published.

This resignation followed the comments of Robert Abela, Prime Minister, who on Sunday, a few hours after the incident acknowledged that the authorities regulating the building industry do not have sufficient resources to carry out their responsibilities and regulate the industry. However, he failed to state or acknowledge that those whom his government appointed to lead the BCA have time and again requested these resources. The government has, so far, repeatedly ignored these requests.

When giving evidence at the Jean Paul Sofia public inquiry, the former CEO of the BCA, Karl Azzopardi, stated that he had repeatedly requested funds for a staff complement of 300 to regulate the industry through inspections and enforcement. The recruitment process was slow and the funds allocated rarely matched what he considered necessary.

From Azzopardi’s evidence at the public inquiry, it results that there were only 11 inspectors at the BCA against a projected requirement of between 40 and 50. In addition to recruitment, he explained that there was also the requirement to train those selected meticulously, as otherwise, they would not be in any way effective.

Karl Azzopardi was squeezed out of his CEO post by the incoming Minister Stefan Zrinzo Azzopardi, who preferred his own man, Jesmond Muscat, who, however, resigned earlier this week. The BCA, in the meantime, is still without adequate resources as the Prime Minister’s words have so far not been matched with the allocation of the required resources.

The lack of resources allocated to the BCA is a major contributor leading to the frequent construction incidents which are becoming a too frequent occurrence. Without funds for the BCA to hire and train staff to carry out its regulatory duties, we may have more incidents in the weeks and months to come. There is a political responsibility to be shouldered for this lack of funding of the BCA. Prime Minister Robert Abela tried to transmit the subtle message that Minister Zrinzo Azzopardi was shouldering this by removing the building industry portfolio from his Ministerial responsibilities in the last Cabinet reshuffle.

This is however not enough.

The BCA is once more without a CEO, who is quite obviously fed up with being treated as a political football by those appointing him. His letter of resignation was not published, but its timing gives a clear message which cannot be ignored.

As results from the Sofia inquiry report,  the BCA inspectorate was made up of eleven persons! An identical number of persons make up the BCA Board of Directors!  Those are the government’s BCA priorities at this point.

When the government starts adequately funding the BCA, then maybe we can have an inspectorate that acts proactively to identify the abusers in the industry before they lead to more deaths.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 28 April 2024

Il-maħfra Presidenzjali: min qed jistaħba wara l-vulnerabbli?

Il-Kamra tal-Kummerċ tagħmel l-argument li l-maħfra Presidenzjali approvata mill-Kabinett fl-aħħar jiem issaħħaħ il-kultura tal-impunità fil-pajjiż. Il-Kamra tal-Kummerċ għandha biċċa raġun.

Għalkemm il-maħfra hi kwalità nobbli, din il-maħfra Presidenzjali għandha riħa tinten ta’ kalkulu u opportuniżmu politiku.

Minn dak li qalu kelliema għall-Gvern, dawk li ibbenefikaw minn dan l-abbuż tas-servizz soċjali (prinċipalment pensjoni għall-epilettiċi) huma vittmi f’din l-istorja: huma persuni vulnerabbli, għaddejjin minn tbatija kbira. Ma nafx kemm dan jgħodd għal kulħadd, imma mill-istejjer li smajna ċertament li hemm persuni li batew u li għadhom qed ibatu u li għal dawn il-pensjoni abbużiva kienet salvauomo li setgħet ittaffi ftit mit-tbatija tagħhom.

Is-suppost maħfra, issa qed tpoġġi lill-vulnerabbli fuq quddiem biex warajhom jistaħbew dawk li sabu opportunità oħra biex imaxtru u jibbenefikaw minn miljuni ta’ euro.

Il-mistoqsija li s’issa għad ma ġietx imwieġba hi dwar x’kienet qed tagħmel it-tmexxija tal-Ministeru għall-Politika Soċjali. Is-Segretarju Permanenti fil-Ministeru u l-Ministru innifsu, quddiem dan kollu, baqgħu ċassi. Qed jgħidu li ma kienu jafu b’xejn, ma ndunaw b’xejn.

Ifisser dan li qegħdin hemm għalxejn? Li l-istrutturi ta’ kontroll fil-Ministeru ma’ ħadmux? Jew li kien hemm kompliċità tant mifruxa li irnexxielha tostor kollox għal ħin twil?

Fid-dawl tal-allegazzjonijiet li persuna tal-fiduċja politika fl-istess Ministeru kien qed jidderieġi dan l-eżerċiżżju ta’ ħmieġ li bih sar abbuż sfaċċjat tal-vulnerabbli, kemm il-Ministru kif ukoll is-Segretarju Permanenti fil-Ministeru għall-Politika Soċjali għandhom jerfgħu r-resposnabbiltà għal dak li ġara u jirreżenjaw bla iktar dewmien.

Wara kollox, ma ndunaw b’xejn, ma kienu jafu b’xejn! Xi ħtieġa hemm li jibqgħu mas-saqajn? Bihom u mingħajrhom xorta! Ikunu aħjar li jwarbu it-tnejn!

Il-frodi tal-benefiċċji soċjali: qiesu ma ġara xejn!

L-informazzjoni li nafu hi limitata. Kull min tkellem qalilna l-biċċa li taqbillu. Jew biex ifarfar inkella biex jitfa’ dell fuq ħaddieħor.

Il-Ministru Falzon jgħidilna li hu ma kellux x’jaqsam. Ħaddieħor, akkużat, qalilna li kien hemm xiħaddieħor fil-Ministeru li kien qed jidderiegi kaz wara l-ieħor.

L-istorja għadna ma nafuhiex kollha. Nafu biss biċċiet. Hemm min hu komdu hekk.

Ħaġa waħda hi ċara: anke jekk wieħed jaċċetta (għalissa) li l-Ministru Falzon mhux involut, huwa jibqa’ politikament responsabbli għal dak kollu li ġara. Imma qiesu ma ġara xejn!

Tourism: the industry does not care

Notwithstanding the increasing numbers of incoming tourists, the tourism industry is currently in a self-destructive mode.  After the carrying capacity study published by the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association (MHRA) in July 2022, one would have expected the Ministry of Tourism or the Malta Tourism Authority (MTA) to take the lead in initiating a public debate on the matter.

The Deloitte report published by the MHRA, in July 2022, entitled Carrying Capacity Study for Tourism in the Maltese Islands has pointed out that the total of existing and planned hotel accommodation would require approximately 5 million tourists per annum to ensure an 80 percent occupancy. This does not take into consideration non-hotel accommodation. If non-hotel accommodation is also taken into account, the problem would be much worse.

This is anything but sustainable. Yet, except for the public discussion on the skills required by foreign workers in the industry, no one is (apparently) bothered by the considerable negative impacts of tourism: impacts on both tourism itself as well as on the residential community. No wonder that studies have identified a developing tourismophobia. Tourismophobia has been described by Catalan anthropologist Manoel Delgado as a mixture of repudiation, mistrust, and contempt for tourists.

The total number of inbound tourists to Malta in 2023 was around 3 million. This accounted for 20.2 million bed nights and an estimated expenditure of €2.7 billion. The employment that this generates is considered by many as a positive contribution to the industry, and sustaining around 50,000 jobs.

The Deloitte report published by MHRA in 2022, however, explains that in 2009, 82 percent of those employed in the tourism sector were Maltese. By 2019 this statistic had decreased to 40.6 percent. The Deloitte report does not explain the reasons behind this trend. It only emphasises that this trend is not unique to the Maltese islands.

However, the Deloitte report goes on to argue that the reliance of the tourism industry on an ever-increasing cosmopolitan labour force is an important contributor to an increasing lack of authenticity of the touristic product.  Who cares?

The ever-increasing volume of incoming tourists has an impact on both the tourist experience as well as on the quality of life of the residential community.

Many years ago a substantial portion of the residential community of Paceville was squeezed out of the locality as a direct result of the impacts of the tourist industry. It seems that no lessons were learned from this experience as various residential communities around the islands are still continuously at the receiving end. No one cares.

Tables and chairs have taken over substantial public areas around our residences, in many instances obstructing access to our homes. Consider, for example, The Strand from Gżira to Sliema: from Manoel Island right to The Ferries, and beyond. Has anyone ever considered the impact of the continuous stretch of chairs and tables on the residential community along the same stretch of road?

This experience is not limited to Sliema but also exists in Marsaskala, St Paul’s Bay, St Julians, and many other areas, including Valletta. Who cares?

The tourism industry is aware of all this. Yet the issues raised are not being addressed. The situation gets worse by the minute.

The residential communities in various localities are voicing their concerns. One of the latest to so do was the Valletta residential community.

The local council elections next June are an opportunity to elect local councilors who are sensitized to the concerns of the residents. We need Local Councils that can take up the fight directly at an institutional level as it is only in this manner that the real issues faced by our communities can be addressed.

We have a tourism industry that only cares about what goes into its bank account: nothing else is of significance. We can compensate for this by having local councils that not only care about our communities but most importantly act swiftly to right the accumulated wrongs.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 21 April 2024