The proposed changes to the development boundaries have raised, and are raising all manner of protests and counter protests in a land that has become newly sensitive to green issues. People are just desperate to see some sort of sense of fair play restored, or perhaps the right word is for fair play to be introduced, to these islands where successive governments have always been, or are perceived to be, weak with the strong and strong with the weak.

The new rich today are not the industrialists or entrepreneurs of the past. They are our contractors and speculators and, while Jo and Joanna Borg struggle with yet another undeserved warden fine or sky high electricity bills, the perception is that the rich are being allowed to get richer far too easily.

So this move, relatively close to an election, is bound to raise a lot of doubts and suspicions, and clearly the timing was not what it could have been. There have been a lot of claims that this was all about votes but I’m not so sure. This is certainly not about capturing a large number of votes, particularly when you compare it to the votes that will be lost because of those who are either miffed at being left out, or those whose property is going to be a totally different one, now that next door is no longer going to be a green field but most probably another block of flats!

Imagine you own a nice old house with fields around and next door is going to be developed. The value of your property plummets, your quality of life suffers while the lucky person whose land is now in zone is guffawing all the way to the bank! You get no compensation and he becomes a millionaire (well maybe a euro millionaire) overnight.

In Gozo, for example, they might have been better off doing nothing than doing what is proposed because now all those whose land is not included are yelling blue murder, not always deservedly but blue murder all the same!

I am also amazed that this is being done for free. Once someone’s piece of land which was outside the development zone was worth say Lm70,000, and inside is now worth Lm700,000, why are we not taxing this immense increase in personal wealth? Is this making maximum use of our resources?

In the last few years, the government has almost ruthlessly stamped down and out on anything seen as a fringe benefit, which is now taxed to the hilt. People on very basic salaries have their car taxed for example, which was quite a blow for many. Why then is it OK to see the personal wealth of a few increase so dramatically? How can such an enormous increase in potential income go untaxed? And let’s be clear: the majority of beneficiaries are no politicians, red blue or green, they are bits of everyone, with some being named and made a scapegoat of totally unfairly.

How much land is still left undeveloped in the development zones though as of today? Why haven’t we first tried to incentivise that being used up first before we give the lucky few an enormous fat cheque which many of us won’t earn in a lifetime?

If you look at the proposals carefully there are a few that are totally justified, as well as some people whose land was very unfairly left out. Shouldn’t this have been done on a case by case basis, rather than an unreserved increase in the boundaries, so that each case could be evaluated properly, with the maximum scrutiny and without any rush?

Too many people are not looking at this issue dispassionately enough though, and worse, are not pointing out the real problems and pitfalls, though a few like the Chamber of Architects have tried to be fair but critical where criticism is deserved because not everything about these proposals is totally wrong. It should not be an issue of Yes or No but of Yes maybe in some cases and No Way in others. We should consider the words of the Chamber of Architects very carefully. After all, this is almost unique in Malta, to hear a body of professionals who can only benefit from this financially, actually speak out against the many pitfalls in this approach.

Since a very high percentage of the land to be included in the zones is government land, something which has not been commented on as yet, it seems some information must be there first, before we can say these moves are justified. How much government land is currently in government’s hands? What is its value? The same exercise should also be carried out on all the properties owned by the government, not only the housing on estates but all the others, particularly the empty ones. Where are they and what’s their value? Did the government need more land at this stage?

As with empty properties, is the government getting the best deal on the land it owns? Is it maximising its resources before it takes more land for development?

A recent contributor and chairman of an important entity (Lawrence Zammit) recently wrote that government was not getting the value it should out of its own assets, particularly its land and property. This should have created a media riot but went unnoticed. Has the homework been done before this environmentally unpopular move was suggested to or decided upon by Cabinet?

It’s very important that people who are being taxed to the hilt, (well, those who have no choice but to declare all their income and so called privileges) feel that the government is looking after its family silver as well as it can. And what is the value of government land coming into scheme? Was it needed? Is that planned for resale, to raise revenue or what? Do we know what we have in terms of land, and what we plan to do with what is being proposed, and was it needed as of now? Was this part of Cabinet’s criteria?

Malta has long stopped being a green and pleasant land. The government must now act as gatekeeper to stop the rot. There have been many positive moves of late, but now this has set the PR machine, in terms of government’s commitment to safeguard our environment, rolling back fast. Of course the economy has to be kept going too, but enormous privileges for a few while the majority are struggling cannot go down well. This should all have been contextualised within a proven determination of the government to make the best use of one of its most important assets and powers, its land and land management in general.

It’s not too late to think this through again though... and manage it better in the national interest, the thing electable governments must always keep uppermost in their minds.