The people of Mellieħa have been asking for an alternative access road for years. I have pressed for one since my first day in politics, because I have seen what happens when one of our limited routes closes: traffic builds, buses are delayed, businesses are disrupted and residents struggle to get on with their day.

Now the government is proposing a national farm waste treatment facility at Qammieħ. Before it asks Mellieħa to accommodate such a project, it must answer a basic question: how will the vehicles get there without placing another burden on roads that are already under pressure?

Malta needs a proper solution for agricultural waste. Farmers deserve a reliable way to deal with it, and producing energy or useful materials from waste is an objective worth pursuing. But a national need does not give the government a licence to choose a site without demonstrating that it is suitable. The people who will live with the consequences have a right to see the evidence.

This is where my work as Shadow Minister for Sustainable Mobility and my duty to the people of the twelfth district meet. A transport decision is not just a line drawn on a map. It determines whether a resident gets home safely, whether a worker arrives on time and whether a business can serve its customers. In Mellieħa, access is part of our quality of life and our livelihood.

I have prepared a series of parliamentary questions on the Qammieħ proposal because residents deserve specific answers. What quantities of waste would arrive each day? How many vehicle journeys would that generate? Where would those journeys begin, which roads would they use and at what hours? How much additional traffic would construction bring? What vehicles would carry material away from the facility? Do the roads have the infrastructural capacity to cope with the demand? Government have not solved the problem that exists, how is increasing traffic ever going to solve it?

The government must publish a full transport assessment covering those questions. It must also show what would happen during a road closure, an accident or an emergency. Anyone familiar with Mellieħa knows that a disruption on one route quickly affects the others. An assessment that works only on a normal day would fail the people it is supposed to protect.

An alternative access road is central to this decision, not the widening of existing routes, which will retain bottlenecks but an alternative route . I have called for better connections for Mellieħa throughout my political career. The proposed facility makes that demand more urgent. Residents cannot be told to bear the traffic first and wait for a solution later.

The impact extends beyond Qammieħ alone. Mellieħa and Għadira are among the places people choose when they want to enjoy Malta. Our beaches, hotels, restaurants and other local businesses support jobs and families. Hospitality matters deeply to the area's economy. Visitors, staff, suppliers and residents all depend on roads that work.

Does anyone really believe that this would not harm tourism? I am asking the government to examine the risk honestly. Could additional vehicle movements affect access during busy periods? Have noise, odour and the storage of agricultural waste been assessed alongside its transport impact? Have hospitality operators and other local businesses had a meaningful opportunity to explain what reliable access means for them? Those questions belong in the decision, not in a discussion held after it.

The government must also explain why it has not engaged with the Mellieħa Local Council and the wider community. A procurement process has moved forward, yet the locality has not been given a clear public account of the site selection and its implications. Consultation cannot mean asking people for their views when the most important choice has effectively been made.

Labour's slogan was "Il-Ħolma Tiegħek. Il-Proġett Tagħna" - "Your dream. Our project." I am certain the people I speak to in Mellieħa did not dream of a Agricultural waste treatment facility at Qammieħ. They have asked for safer access, reliable services and a say in decisions affecting their locality. A government that claims to listen must start by hearing those demands.

That means publishing the comparison with other possibilities. Why was Qammieħ preferred? How were transport distances, road capacity, environmental effects and the area's dependence on tourism weighed? The government should also publish credible forecasts of vehicle movements. A proposed annual capacity is not a daily traffic plan; the public needs to know what would actually travel on our roads.

I know Mellieħa has a strong case. Our road network is already vulnerable, our alternative access remains inadequate, and our local economy depends on people being able to reach us. These are substantial reasons to challenge the proposed location. It is for the government to show, with evidence open to scrutiny, that it has properly addressed them.

My position is clear: solve the agricultural waste problem, but do not make Mellieħa pay for poor planning. Answer the parliamentary questions. Publish the studies. Consult the council, residents, farmers and businesses while their views can still change the outcome. Deliver safe alternative access if Qammieħ is to remain under consideration. And if another location serves Malta better, choose it.

The people of Mellieħa have a right to safe roads, a voice in decisions about their home and an economy that can continue to thrive. I will keep pressing for all three. Before choosing the site, the government must understand the impact and act responsibly.

Ivan Castillo is Opposition Whip & Shadow Minister for Sustainable Mobility