I congratulate the young engineer-to-be who wrote about the Gozo tunnel. I beg to differ on his conclusions.

The government and the Opposition are so keen and so much in favour of the tunnel carrying cars when there are many more viable options which cost less and have a smaller environmental impact. Like liberalisation of transport between Malta and Gozo. It did so much good to Malta when other sectors were liberalised. I think this is the only sector with a monopoly. Imagine other companies ferrying people, cars and cargo to Valletta, to Marsa, etc.

I would like to see in the next electoral manifestos a proposal for an underground metro system with a link to Gozo. And the argument should not be whether it is economically viable or not. All public transport systems work at a loss but huge benefits are reaped: less pollution and more efficient travel.

The middle road is best. Connecting Gozo physically will remove its natural barrier, which protected it a bit from the ravages that Malta has undergone in its natural environment. I wonder why the experts and our saviours who pride themselves in their vision see a bleak future for the little natural environment left in Malta and Gozo. They continue developing outwards and upwards and see construction as the motor of the economy when it can be redirected or toned down. They say it is what the people want but they do not educate the people that we need the open spaces, that we need beautiful skylines and the villages with quaint houses nestling on hills away from the ridges.

The middle road is best: increasing connectivity but not making Gozo a part of Malta. It is more beneficial for the future of Malta if Gozo keeps its character.