The Prime Minister is being absolutist and stubborn in ignoring civil society's opposition to development at Zonqor, Front Harsien ODZ said in a statement this morning.
In reply to comments made by the Prime Minister that plans to build part of the American University of Malta at Zonqor Point will continue, the Front said this is even more worrying when he chose to make this declaration when Parliament is in summer recess and without publishing the agreement with developers Sadeen Group.
Front Harsien ODZ asks the Prime Minister to declare whether any electoral obligations exist with Sadeen Group, it said.
Our resistance to development at Zonqor will keep growing, and civil society's voice will be raised at a level which cannot be ignored by a democratic government.
In a separate statement, Din l-Art Helwa said it is strongly disappointed by the Prime Minister’s statement that he still intends to encourage a new university to be built in the countryside at Zonqor. A rally protesting against this location was attended by over 3,000 citizens last June, and people expect the government to listen to their concerns.
The public consultation exercise to identify alternative sites seems to have been just a sham, as the site was already chosen. The Prime Minister’s argument that not locating the university at Zonqor would be ‘absolutist’, is incomprehensible.
“Sticking to principles is not being absolutist. This is not just about Zonqor point, but about the future of Malta’s countryside and natural spaces,” said Din l-Art Helwa President Maria Grazia Cassar.
“The Government should lead by example and Din l-Art Helwa felt heartened that the pleas of the public and civil society were being listened to, when it learnt that areas in Cottonera were being studied. It is unbelievable that the project is still forging ahead in an ODZ area, when there are numerous other alternatives. It is a big let down for all of us,” she added.
Din l-Art Helwa repeated its concerns, already expressed in May that it is unacceptable for the government to have proposed virgin land for construction, instead of considering disused or brownfield sites. The land which government has put on the table will become worth millions to certain individuals as a commercial building site, however it is worth far, far more to our future generations.
Government sources had said that the project will only be viable if ODZ land is used. This just shows that the government is disregarding the environmental cost of using up more countryside, when other sites are available.
It would clearly be preferable to rehabilitate a dilapidated site, or find a use for existing buildings, than to take up more unbuilt land in the countryside or close to the sea. Open spaces should be preserved for the well-being of the community, as a respite from the concrete jungle that MEPA is now encouraging. Whether modern or historic buildings are identified, a project of this type should be accommodated close to population centres and not in the countryside.