The French connection
Much has been written about the two years of French occupation in Malta. During the 268 years of the Order of St John in Malta there had never been any German Grand Master. The pique between the French and the Germans is very old.
The election of Ferdinand von Hompesch zu Bolheim on July 17, 1797 was not welcomed by the other languages, especially the French and their allies. Hompesch was chosen as there could not be any agreement on an alternative. It was a period of turmoil in Europe with Napoleon and his campaigns. It is believed that the French knights invited Napoleon to take over the islands of Malta. It was a case of cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face.
When Napoleon anchored his fleet in the vicinity of the islands, he was not fully aware of the grand fortifications and probably would have continued on his journey to Egypt as he could not afford a long battle with the consequent losses. In 1798, Hompesch was warned that the French fleet intended to attack Malta as well. He disregarded the warning and took no action to reinforce the island’s defences.
On June 6, 1798, the advance squadron of the French fleet reached Malta. One ship was permitted to enter the harbour for repairs. On June 9, the main fleet arrived. Napoleon had a force of 29,000 men against Hompesch’s 7,000. The French knights opened the gates to the city so that Napoleon could march in without any opposition.
Napoleon was in desperate need for funds to pay his armies. He saw Malta as one big treasure chest and immediately began looting all treasures, whether those belonged to the knights or to the Maltese. The Maltese objected as many of the treasures, especially in churches and the Maltese nobility, had nothing to do with the knights.
On September 2, this anger erupted in a popular uprising during an auction of church property in Mdina and, within days, thousands of Maltese irregulars had driven the French garrison into Valletta and the harbour area. The absolute majority of the Maltese saw Napoleon and the French as pirates and looters. They had already taken action to camouflage and hide ecclesiastical treasures and had more than enough of the looting. With the assistance of the British Navy, the Maltese had the upper hand.
Everyone was dissatisfied with the arrogance of the French. It can be easily stated that the only proper alternative were the British. Perhaps it was not the best choice but, in the end, the French had to leave our islands.
Frans Said – St Paul’s Bay
Ever more vacant properties
In a busy thoroughfare close to where I live, there are no less than three apartment blocks which have been completed, inclusive of their underlying garages and shops, for almost three years now.
But they all still sport the estate agents’ posters affixed to windows and walls saying that they are “For Sale” or “To Let”. Better confirmation than this that these developments have not been disposed of by their owners or contracting builders there couldn’t be.
For how long are such developments allowed to remain in such a situation?
It stands to reason that when a long time passes after completion and a property remains not sold or occupied then such development would have been a purely speculative (the MDA uses the euphemism “investment”) one.
Certainly, this cannot be called economically needed FDI and what it really only serves is to continue to feed developers’ greed irrespective of what is the alleged demand for their products.
This long time-gap between completion and disposal is evidence of national economic resources pushed into a product that is not selling or that is outrageously overpriced. And an economically attentive or savvy Planning Authority should always be on alert to have in place some financial disincentive to stop such situations, such as daily fines, or others. Doesn’t the country have enough of long vacant and unutilised properties and must we now also add to the number through these glorified “projects”?
Of course, another wise alternative would be for the Ministry of Housing to be empowered to, some time after completion, requisition some of these dead developments for use as the government’s own social housing. This would certainly help to reduce the now ever impending increases of, consequential to Rent Regulation Board decisions, claims for state subsidising of rents.
Certainly, the Planning Authority should never be allowed to just get as far as issuing a building permit and then simply not bothering at all when a property is both completed and used.
Increasing the quantum of dead national assets is certainly not good national economic management.
John Consiglio – Birkirkara
Letters to the editor should be sent to editor@timesofmalta.com. Please include your full name, address and ID card number. The editor may disclose personal information to any person or entity seeking legal action on the basis of a published letter.