It seems that the measures announced during the last budget speech have already gone with the wind. It is now a matter of receiving and settling the bills once the Christmas festivities are over and that we realise what "burden sharing" means in terms of our domestic economic turbulences. Let's face it, what is envisaged to happen next year is quite beyond our control. The international economic recession would unavoidably leave its marks on our economy and, whether we like it or not, we have to face the music and use our resources to minimise the impact on our standard of living as much as possible.
Rather than promoting the new Valletta entrance rehabilitation project as a political commitment by the party in government to implement its electoral promises, the rebuilding of City Gate and the reconstruction of the Opera House have been depicted as the initial phase of capital investment injection aimed at ensuring the necessary stimulus to revive commercial and economic activities. Killing two birds with one stone, the government strategists managed to dilute the disenchantment caused by the revised water and electricity tariffs and diverted the public's attention towards the Opera House and City Gate renovations.
Since the announcement of this mega project, controversy has emerged once again. Although the nature of the project itself and its relevance to our economic demands are undisputable, the long-term effects of their utilisation and their immediate visual impact in terms of aesthetics and architecture are stirring a hot debate among the population.
From what I gathered over the past days, through public ministerial pronouncements, the government's aim is to relocate Parliament to a modern and fully equipped building situated in a prominent place in the capital. It would symbolise our strong credentials in the form of the highest democratic institution and, at the same time, it would allow members of Parliament to perform their duties in a professional set-up and an excellent work environment. Such a move would also allow the Presidential palace to become more public-friendly, a natural tourist attraction, and it would regain its prestigious status and grandeur.
Granted, but, in my opinion, we would be paying a very high price should Renzo Piano's brief include the re-housing of Parliament and not the construction of a state-of-the-art opera house on the old theatre site.
It is not a question of being nostalgic or apolitical but, as a nation that cherishes the values of culture, art, literature and history, we have no other option but to take this opportunity to rebuild a theatre where all sorts of performing acts could take place under one roof.
It is really pathetic to argue that the existing theatres and conference centres and theatrical halls in Valletta are more than enough. With all due respect, when we talk of a new opera house we would be referring to a higher level of performances and cultural representations than those now experienced in other theatres. Just like the performances staged at the Catholic Institute and at the Manoel Theatre attain different levels - besides attracting different type of audiences - there would be a further quality leap should we go for a newly-built opera house boasting of the latest amenities and modern facilities.
Valletta would regain its cultural soul. It would become a city that truly deserves a World Heritage award. But, most of all, it would make us all proud that we are part of a nation that is not only renowned for its hospitality and historical heritage, but is also enriched with traditional and contemporary works of arts and culture. There is no city in Europe without an Opera House, so why should our capital be inferior?
As for the House of Representatives, there is not much to ponder about. A quick search around the city bastions would be enough to let you detect the proper alternative site!
manuelmicallef@onvol.net