It seems that the Grand Harbour and the area surrounding it will be a hot political potato in the coming weeks, and will possibly play an important part in the run-up to the next general election.

Both major political parties are giving great attention to the development, regeneration and embellishment of the historical and strategic area of Malta. It might be because a good percentage of the population lives there or works there, and therefore there are thousands of votes that will be taken into account when the time comes.

Last Saturday, the government announced a 20-point plan aimed at regenerating Grand Harbour by reinforcing the national identity and promoting the geo-strategic importance of this natural port. The plan is based on five main areas – tourism, culture, maritime services, environment and recreation, and industry.

The presentation of the plan comes after the Malta Labour Party, for its part, held a series of consultation meetings – and making public announcements after each and every one of them – to discuss its own plan for the revitalisation of Grand Harbour. The MLP will soon be presenting its own ideas for the regeneration of the area.

During the past years, the government has already invested heavily in the Grand Harbour area. The creation of the Valletta and Cottonera waterfronts are only two of the initiatives that were taken, and they have both helped to give the area a new look. The government now wants to build on these successes.

For its part, the MLP has realised that the government (read Nationalist Party) was making headway in areas that are traditionally pro-Labour, and therefore thought it fit to come up with its own document on the regeneration of Grand Harbour that, it said, it would implement when in government.

Over the coming weeks we will no doubt hear the MLP saying that the government’s 20-point plan for Grand Harbour was born after Labour announced its own intentions, while the Nationalist Party will say that Labour acted only after the government had given great attention to an area that had been neglected for many years.

This is how things work in Malta. Both political parties now will want to take the credit for being the first to speak about Grand Harbour and both will want to make the people believe that their plan is the better one.

Would it not have been better to have the two sides sitting around a table, holding consultation meetings with the parties concerned, and coming up with a common vision of what they want for Grand Harbour? Would it not have been better for the two sides to come up with their own plans and then debate them in Parliament so as to have one common front on a subject that is, after all, apolitical?

As things stand now, we run the risk of starting something and changing it midway through, with the result that there will be a repeat of the Mater Dei Hospital saga. If this government starts the Grand Harbour project, and then Labour is elected to power and changes the plans, are we going to have to go through a situation that is similar to the one we have had to endure about the new hospital at Tal-Qroqq?

While, sad as they might have been, all the problems surrounding the completion of the Mater Dei Hospital did not affect anything else since the complex was being built on “new” land, the same cannot be said for Grand Harbour where commercial, touristic and maritime activity must continue unabated and with the least negative effects as possible all throughout the work that will take place.

Starting something and then changing it midway through – in an area as strategically vital as Grand Harbour – will be more harmful than beneficial.