For those who in the past considered membership of the EU as quite equivalent to the discovery of the Holy Grail, Europe could do no wrong. It would deal with all most fairly and transparently, so that all would reap benefits according to what would be their due, neither more nor less.

The fact that a member state happened to be among the smallest would in no way mean that it could be shortchanged, in comparison with how the larger states would be dealt with. For preferential treatment does not exist within the EU. That’s what they wanted to believe.

Now that a good number of years has passed during which we directly experienced the consequences of EU membership, we all can come to our own conclusions regarding how correct this premise was.

I would not be surprised to find that there are some who still believe in it, since indeed, there are people who still claim that it is untrue that the earth is spherical, when actually it is flat. 

***

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

The head of the Planning Authority has made some incredible statements. His insights into both economic and environmenal development seem seriously restricted. The crux is his apparent belief that when the free market is allowed to dominate this country’s scarsest reource -- land -- the economy will continue to expand. On the back of the wealth creation that will result, Malta can modernise. He almost seemed to want to give the impression that on such a  basis, his role makes him the lead driver in the modernisation of the  country.

It is clear that were are still far away from an understanding and an appreciation of how spatial planning should be carried out in this small island.

Till quite recently, at the Planning Authroity there would be a show of determination to intervene about even the smallest details. I remember the Authority wanting to dictate to a promoter who was converting a cinema into a shopping plaza the size of each and every shop that he intended to build.

Now the pendulum has swung the opposite way. Any developer can find a facile solution for any “modern” proposal that he comes up with.

Till a balance is found between the two excesses there is still much to travel. It should have been found long ago. When and if it is found, it will be too late. 

***

WATER SUPPLY

Somebody drew my attention to an issue that was very hot during the first half of the 1980’s but which with time, cooled down. It is hardly mentioned any more -- the water supply.

Forty years ago demand for water greatly exceeded the supply. This used to be drawn mostly from the underground aquifers where rain water accumulated. At the time, the then Labour government failed to accept that investment was needed in systems that could transform seawater into running water for households.

Today this is the standard procedure and we depend on it in a big way to satisfy the demand for potable water.

According to my contact, we now have reached the stage where we depend too much on it, so that this has become our most critical vulnerability. He’s got a point and I doubt whether he was just exagerrating.