A trust to run the opera house (1)

Peter Apap Bologna (The Sunday Times, January 11), by his own admission, is looking at the arts from a financial angle. Accounting and the arts are miles apart. One is materialistic and about profits, the other is spiritual and broadens the mind.

Like others, he prefers to ignore my argument that the theatre could be rebuilt without causing a drain on public funds. It is clear that many have no idea how theatres function all over the world. It is only in Malta, where we expect the government to do everything for us, that we miss the beauty and pleasure of doing something purely for art's sake.

While some seem to be keen on the Barry design, others have fallen into the 'Emperor's new clothes' syndrome and think that anything by Renzo Piano must be avant-garde, even if it is an abstract absurdity and monstrosity.

Readers have to wake up and find out who will gain from a Piano project. This is not political dogma. This is the wrong advice to the Prime Minister. The theatre design is irrelevant; its use is important. Placing Parliament at the city's entrance will hasten the demise of Valletta.

Regarding the housing of Parliament, the only logical place is the Main Guard. Who bothers to take a good look at the back of that one-storey building? Parliament should be in the centre of the city. Mr Apap Bologna also mentions the grand houses of Valletta. I agree with him and Madeleine Gera. A detailed inventory should be drawn up and, if need be, these should become the property of the state. Seeing a grand house in ruins and lying derelict just because the front door is being used as a retail outlet shows how low we have stooped.

With the establishment of a trust, the theatre could be rebuilt and kept running without any money from taxation. The €80 million saved could be diverted to the Main Guard and other grand houses.