Editorial: World Heritage status at risk

Local residents have protested about the overwhelming amount of construction for years now, and although some applications have been turned down or revoked, there are still many new ones being filed. And there are growing fears that the protests are in vain.

Somehow, the government seems to think that its carefully curated public image is the only one seen overseas: from photos of a nearly empty Blue Lagoon to the glitzy film festivals. It seems oblivious to social media videos of vandalism, bad behaviour and residents’ aggravation.

Perhaps, though, the government will finally listen to international voices that warn of the dire consequences for Malta’s image if nothing is done. And the significant word there is ‘done’. Slapping enforcement notices on the Ġnejna kiosks after all those years has hardly persuaded anyone that tolerance for illegalities is actually swinging to the correct level.

In the past weeks, Malta’s plight has been highlighted by three international organisations for all the wrong reasons: Europa Nostra; ICOMOS; and UNESCO.

Hermann Parzinger, the head of Europe’s largest heritage organisation Europa Nostra, was in Malta recently after a 20-year gap.

He was less than impressed with the casual way in which we mistreat or destroy our cultural heritage, warning that losing them was not only irreversible but would seriously dent our tourism potential.

One example he gave was the planned demolition of the British-era barracks in the 19th century Fort Chambray, saying: “things are happening in the certain interests of developers, which heritage professionals have different views on”.

And he shrugged off the compromises proposed, warning that saving the façade made no sense in some cases and that buildings should be “preserved as an entity”.

We also learned that the international conservation NGO, the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), was unhappy with plans to turn Evans Building in Valletta into tourist accommodation, recommending an update to its conservation plan to “more explicitly define the acceptable limits of change”. 

And more recently, a UNESCO committee warned the government that existing local plans and planning regulations for Valletta are far from enough to protect it. This is not the first time that the capital city’s presence on the World Heritage list has been threatened by development – not only within its confines but also its surroundings. It is not enough to look at Valletta; you also have to look from it, and what you see in Gżira and Sliema is hardly the right context – even if you ignore the illegalities.

This is not an organisation to be ignored. It is not going to be impressed or distracted by headlines about Ġnejna kiosks. It wants an updated conservation report for Valletta by tDecember next year, and the work that needs to be done is vast: a ‘views and vistas analysis’ for the area, and revision of the 2006 North Harbour Local Plan, 2022 Grand Harbour Plan and a planning policy regulating building heights. And let us not forget a “comprehensive” heritage impact assessment on Manoel Island before “any decision” is made about its future.

And it does not stop there: to underline the lack of faith it has in the government to self-regulate, it also asked for details of future projects to be submitted to the World Heritage Centre.

UNESCO can only recommend. Europa Nostra and ICOMOS can only warn. But the consequences are dire and all too real: are the islands ready to face them?