Even in the tourism sector we sometimes give the impression that we have a strategic outlook that builds on two contradictory perspectives. On the one hand we insist that if Malta-bound tourism is to remain an attractive product, it must reduce the number of arrivals and concentrate on an increase in their quality, meaning an increase in the average tourist spend. To succeed on this second count, we must improve the quality of the product on offer.
While all this is being said, permits to build more hotels or for existing hotels to increase the number of rooms for their guests continue to be granted at a quick rate. New hotels are getting built at the centre of the best tourism areas, serving to multiply the mayhem in streets and squares. All this is certainly not improving the quality of the isalnd's urban and touristic environment available.
The counter-reply to this argument has up to now, not been negatived by the facts: Malta bound tourism has continued to expand. It reminds one of an athlete on a bicycle - to keep going, he/she needs to keep accelerating, for otherwise, slowing down would make the bicycle tilt and skid to the ground.
***
THE GENERAL WORKERS' UNION
There's nothing wrong with giving the General Workers' Union the opportunity to make serious commercial use of its property in order to sustain its finances. The government transfered the property to it during the 1950s when it was led by Joe Attard Kingswell, so it could maintain its trade union and media initiatives. It was a good move.
In 1997 as a government, we widened the relevant contract's parameters to allow for some commercial use of the building. Latterly, the contract needed further widening which was done in a transparent manner.
The GWU was and remains an indispensable national institution to promote the defence of living standards for workers and their families. One can criticise it for certain aspects of what it does, but it still deserves full support for the projects that it runs.
***
WITH INCENTIVES
In the efforts that need to be carried out somehow to reduce the volume of traffic on our roads, I agree with those who argue that by themselves, incentives will not be enough to achieve the desired outcome. It is true that there should be incentives in order to reduce car usage, but in parallel with them there should also be penalties or higher expenses associated with driving.
At present governments seem to be afraid to go down this route (and not only where traffic is concerned). However there's a limit to the necessary changes that can be introduced purely on the back of the so-called feel good. The political parties are not prepared to accept this reality.
Meanwhile, those who claim that incentives and new penalites on the driving of private vehicles will still not work if to travel from A to B, effective and affordable alternatives to going there by car do not exist, have a good point. To be honest, as of now, such alternatives are simply not available.