The court recently stopped development projects that breached local plans for the area. So it was clearly just a matter of time until Prime Minister Robert Abela decided it was the local plans that had to be changed.

He is not the only one saying so: Opposition leader Bernard Grech also said the same thing. Any similarity, though, stops there.

The latter has made it clear Malta needs a planning system that aims to build stronger communities rather than push economic development at the expense of quality of life.

Abela, on the other hand, has not verbalised any such aim or mission, rather sticking to a script which says that the nature of the revision “could be up for debate”, with “different stakeholders likely to have opposing views”. There is no reason why a revision of local plans should not be part of the government’s economic vision for Malta’s future. After all, it needs to be updated to reflect the realities of a falling birthrate, a work permit policy riddled with loopholes for greed, and sustainable tourism.

However, what should not be part of the revision is appeasement for developers. In the past, Abela said changes to the local plans would be unfair: How can you refuse one property owner the right to build and to make money off his or her property when everyone else has done so? Apart from conveniently forgetting the fact that any construction automatically means years of distress for neighbours, Abela is looking at the situation in a simplistic way.

The issue was highlighted by the Chief Justice when he recently threw out plans to add six stories to a ‘landmark building’ in Sliema, saying “Two wrongs don’t make a right”. So many dubious decisions have been taken by the Planning Commission and even more dubious plans submitted by developers. It has been left to NGOs,

residents and the court to fight for the right to protect against unbridled construction – and even then, atrocities continue to shock us.

At some point, should the government not put a stop to the ‘wrongs’, even if it is too late to save so many places? The latest battlegrounds are streets of two-storey terraced houses, whose owners realise that if one were to be dropped, then the rest would follow like bowling pins.

There are multiple reasons to save them, from protecting a way of life to the aesthetic and heritage value, and from preventing overcrowding and density to avoiding the pressure on drainage, parking and noise pollution.

How can we stop this? Residents successfully fought in Santa Luċija, but others in Swieqi lost their case. And now a group of Għargħur residents are objecting to plans for flats to replace terraced houses. They argue that “although local plans allow for higher building heights, this does not mean that permits for additional construction should be automatically granted”.

The residents want a revision in planning laws and policies, but the fear is that any review would be motivated by backroom deals with developers.

We could wait with bated breath for developers to realise that supply has outstripped demand but, by then, most of Malta’s urban fabric will have been decimated, replaced by buildings destined to remain white elephants.

Would it not be preferable for planning laws to be reviewed now to reflect the need to protect this urban fabric from rife speculation in the future?

So far, only one minister – Miriam Dalli – has stood up in parliament and categorically declared herself against opening up further land for construction. We dare government MPs to stand up in parliament and declare what should be the obvious.