Vincent A Galea (TMID, 30 November) asks “why don’t we ... rebuild the City Gate again exactly as it was?”

This begs the question: exactly as it was when? Presumably he is referring to the gate of fond memory built by the British in the 1860s which we replaced by the present abomination to accommodate the passage of carnival floats. But the British themselves had destroyed an earlier gate on the site built by the Knights in the 1630s. This was an austere one arched structure designed by the illustrious Maltese architect Tumas Dingli. It was he also who built the arched stone causeway spanning the ditch to the gate that survives to this day encased in the present much widened approach to the gate. Dingli’s bridge is the only surviving component of the Knight’s Porta San Giorgio (city gate). It survived the destruction of Dingli’s gate by the British, survived the enemy Axis bombing, and survived our destruction of the British gate. Having survived for nigh on 400 years it should not be destroyed now. Yet that is precisely what the Piano plan envisages. It is fundamental to the credo of restoration that any surviving element be preserved. So any proposed plan for the restoration of the few metres part of the kilometres long unique fortifications encircling the World Heritage Site of Valletta known as city gate should incorporate Dingli’s bridge.

It has been announced that tens of millions of euros have been allocated for the restoration of the bastions. Surely the restoration of the shameful city gate site should be a priority in the use of these funds? Yet no word on this has been forthcoming. It is high time that prevarication on this issue is terminated. We have endured the indignity of city gate long enough. Given that Dingli’s bridge should be preserved it would seem not unreasonable to suggest that Dingli’s gate be reinstated on the site, reuniting the gate with the bridge and restoring harmony to the crucial entrance to our capital city. There would be no destruction of surviving elements and we would have a gate befitting our fortifications and city, just as it was in the 1630s. Of course the modern accretions around Dingli’s narrow bridge would have to be removed. Let us restore this site. What are the people who decide these matters – the politicians – waiting for?

Dr John Samut-Tagliaferro

Zebbug

Gozo