The saga of the Mrieħel and Townsquare towers is now entering a new phase, with the planning appeal stopwatch due to start ticking shortly – most probably towards the end of the month. It is known that, so far, Sliema Local Council and a number of environmental NGOs will be appealing against the 4 August decision of the Planning Authority to approve the “Fawlty Towers” at Mrieħel and Townsquare Sliema.
The financing of the projects is next. The banks cannot increase their already substantial exposure to loans that are dependent on building speculation. Consequently, the developers will inevitably have to seek the involvement of private citizens and, possibly, institutional investors. Most probably, the process for financing the projects has already commenced; it will involve the issuing of bonds to the public and will normally be sponsored by a bank and a stock-broking agency.
The bank or banks and stockbrokers sponsoring the bond issue will have to ensure that the bonds are subject to an ‘appropriateness and suitability testing’ subject to such direction as the Malta Financial Services Authority may consider necessary and appropriate. Also, in the light of past local unpleasant experiences, the Authority will undoubtedly be guided by the need to ensure that prospective investors fully understand the inherent risks of the proposed investments. It will also ensure that detailed information is published in the form of a suitable prospectus in which the small print is both legible and understandable.
Those who finance the high-rise projects should shoulder responsibility for their impact, together with the Planning Authority and the developers. They will potentially make it happen, so they should carry the can. It is important to get this message across: those who will invest in the Gasan and Tumas bonds intended to finance the “Fawlty Towers” should receive more than a monetary return on their investment. The moment they sign up they will also assume co-responsibility – with the developers, the Planning Authority, the bank or banks and the sponsoring stockbrokers – for this projected development.
Word is going around on the need to boycott the services and products placed on the market by the Gasan and Tumas Groups. Journalist Jürgen Balzan, writing in MaltaToday, described these services and products as being wide-ranging (hotels, car-dealerships, gaming, finance and property) which easily impact on the daily life of a substantial number of Maltese citizens. However, such a boycott’s only link with the ‘Fawlty Towers’ would be through the owners. It would be preferable for a boycott to have a direct link with the offensive action. In this context, the forthcoming bond issue to finance the ‘Fawlty Towers’ presents itself as a suitable opportunity.
A boycott is a non-violent instrument of protest that is perfectly legitimate in a democratic society. The boycotting of the forthcoming bond issue would send a clear message that people will not be complicit in further ruining the urban fabric of Sliema and ensure that development at Imrieħel is such that the historic landscape is fully respected.
A social impact assessment, if properly carried out, would have revealed the apprehensions of the residents in particular the residents on the Tignè peninsula. But, unfortunately, as stated by Sliema Green Local Councillor Michael Briguglio, the existing policy-making process tends to consider such studies as an irritant rather than as a tool for holistic management and community participation.
We have had some recent converts on the desirability of social impact assessments, such as Professor Alex Torpiano, Dean of the Faculty for the Built Environment at the University of Malta. Prof. Torpiano, in an opinion piece published by The Malta Independent this week, stressed that spatial planning in Malta needs a social-economic dimension. Unfortunately, I do not recollect the professor himself practising these beliefs as the leading architect in the MIDI and Cambridge projects on the Tignè peninsula, a stone’s throw from Townsquare!
Investing in this bond issue is not another private decision: it will have an enormous impact on the community.
Responsibility for this ever-increasing environmental mess has to be shouldered by quite a few people in Malta. Even the banks have a very basic responsibility – and not one that should be shouldered just by the Directors: the shareholders should also take an interest before decisions are taken and not post factum.
I understand that the directors of APS Bank have already taken note of the recent statements regarding the environment by Archbishop Charles Scicluna. As such, it stands to reason that APS will (I hope) not be in any way associated with the financing process for the ‘Fawlty Towers’. However, there is no news as yet from the other banks, primarily from the major ones – ie Bank of Valletta and HSBC.
This is a defining moment in environmental action in Malta. It is time for those that matter to stand up and be counted – and the sooner the better.
An architect and civil engineer, the author is Deputy Chairman of Alternattiva Demokratika – The Green Party in Malta. [email protected], http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com