Environment Minister Jose Herrera, during an interview which appeared in The Malta Independent last Sunday, made a particular argument which could raise concerns regarding land reclamation, not excluding commercial elements while stressing that the main aim of the projects will be environmental.

The minister had explained that this year, “we will be presenting two studies in relation to land reclamation. The first will deal with the environmental aspect: to identify sites where potential land reclamation can take place with the least – and preferably no – environmental impact. So areas on which such work would result in a major environmental impact will be excluded. This also does not mean that all identified sites will see land reclamation.” This particular point is, at least, positive if the government does go through with this land reclamation idea, in the sense that they do not intend to target environmentally important zones.

The minister then went on to describe the second study, and herein is the more controversial aspect. “The second study will launch an exercise to see what projects can be carried out on identified sites, and then detailed studies on all the sites will be carried out. What is certain is that from our Ministry, and from the government, the main aim of these projects will be environmental. This does not mean that the project won’t have a commercial element to them, but the emphasis on these projects would be environmental.”

What exactly does the minister mean by commercial elements... Does he mean a small kiosk on a promenade extension, or perhaps something larger, like full-blown restaurants or shops?

This is a question that the Environment Minister must answer, and must answer clearly.

If land reclamation is to be considered, then that land should be used solely for the public’s enjoyment, and should mean that they will not include commercial elements. Such as the possible extension of green promenades or beaches, or perhaps the creation of a small green park for the public to enjoy in the more densely populated areas. It should not be allowed to be rented, leased, or used in anyway by either the public sector or the private sector to make money off of.

It of course also raises other questions, including property price issues, should someone with a sea-side view suddenly having a new building erected on reclaimed land, no matter how small.

Malta is already densely populated. The main issue is the lack of green space. If the government wants to reclaim land, then do it completely for the right reasons, to give the public more space to breathe. The economy is doing well, as the government points out at each and every turn, therefore it shouldn’t take the idea of reclaiming land, run with it, claim it will be used for environmental purposes but then say that there might be a commercial element.

There are many who would argue that if that is the case, then don’t do it altogether, but then again, people didn’t want part of Zonqor to be promised to the AUM, and that happened, didn’t want soaring towers in Paceville, but that happened ( after the government presented a master plan allowing such giant buildings, only to then backtrack due to the public outcry, and let it happen anyway with no plan whatsoever).

If we are going to make a push for land reclamation, then do it solely to expand public parks and green promenades, in zones which have little impact on the environment, with no commercial additions, no buildings constructed.