Infrastructure Minister Ian Borg today shared on his social media pages (see below) a November 2017 editorial, in which The Malta Independent had urged the government to get on with the Central Link project.

In that editorial, this newsroom had written that the project should not be stopped by a minority when it serves a much larger majority.

We wish to make the following points in reaction:

Firstly, The Malta Independent is not against the project per se, but rather has serious concerns about its environmental impact. We have never been against projects aimed at alleviating Malta’s chronic traffic problem. But, on the other hand, we have always been champions of environmental protection.

Secondly, when the editorial was penned in 2017, detailed plans about the project and, more specifically about how it would affect the surrounding environment, were not available. Back then, we did not know that over 500 mature trees would be uprooted, or that 49,000 square metres of virgin land would be taken up.

Thirdly, while we agree that a solution to ease traffic flow in the area is needed, we do not think that the development should come at such a high environmental cost.

Back in 2017, studies that show how widening these roads would lead to induced traffic – meaning that the wider the roads the heavier the traffic – had not yet come out.

Back then, opposition to the project was not as harsh as it has become lately. That minority is not so minor anymore. This started happening when more detailed project plans were published, and the extent of the environmental destruction became clearer.

Back then, the plans looked different to how they are now. In fact, changes were still being made up until a few days ago.

Positions may change when more facts emerge. Our position on the need for traffic alleviation projects remains the same, but so does our position on safeguarding the environment – a position that the newspaper has always taken since its inception over 25 years ago, well before Ian Borg went into politics.

Once again, we are not against upgrading our road infrastructure. But we are against the destruction of trees. This is something we have remained consistent on.

This is why we promoted Sunday’s protest and reported it with prominence and published countless reports, editorials, Indepth programmes and opinion pieces on the need to preserve the little green we have left.

The Editorial Team