Will it be built or not?

The latest authoritative statement about the Gozo tunnel (in the document on a regional strategy for Gozo) stated that the project is being reconsidered. All understood that there had been a radical rethink about the project which could lead to its cancellation. The reasons why were not clearly laid out.

They cannot be financial in scope, since if I understood correctly, the project was going to be implemented on the back of private financial investment. I always was sceptical about how this could really happen, but so it was declared.

As one who never agreed with the concept of the tunnel for many reasons, I cannot say I would be sorry if it is not built at all. On the other hand, it is not such a good idea to keep indefinitely hanging a proposal of such massive significance.

Meanwhile as I always believed right along, if the project can only be carried out with public funds, it is very doubtful whether the conditions exist for a prudent financial arrangement given prevailing circumstances.                    

***

MENTAL HEALTH

There come times when a lot is being said about mental health. In any event, a general agreement exists that the issue merits deep comitment and attention. Initiatives are launched which seem to confirm strategies that would reinforce such an approach. In this sector too, excellent NGOs are carrying out good work sustainably.

So is it perhaps a wrong impressiion I have that there still is not a focussed national approach for this sector? Both by way of investment in concrete facilities and in the provision of modern services related to diverse aspects of mental health, covering all social strata of the population...? It seems as if there are too much disjointedness, too many elements lacking.

I hope I am wrong.                

***

QUALIFIED MAJORITY

Within the EU, appeals are multiplyng for decisions to be taken with a qualified majority in areas where they now need unanimity. It is also being claimed that this has to happen so as to enable the Union to respond in a timely fashion to arising challenges and not remain paralysed by an inability to decide.

Those who argue in this way say too that without such a change, the enlargement of the EU that is being proposed for the coming years will not be practicable. No doubt the pressure to whittle unanimity down will continue to increase.              

For the larger countries, this would not create too many difficulties. They know they could rely on a coalition of the big states should major differences arise. The same cannot be said of the smaller countries, foremost among which Malta, Luxembourg and Cyprus. In our case the policy issues that would create most problems include taxation, neutrality, security and defence as well as foreign policy. Surely, there will be others.

As of when the coming European Parliament elections are done (if not before) Malta should expect to come under pressure to agree with qualified majority decision making in these areas.