A quote by Aldous Huxley hit a little too close to home: “familiarity breeds indifference”. I quite often stop to think about why we have somehow caught ourselves in this abysmal spiral of never-ending construction and environmental degradation, and upon reading those three simple words, I realised, there was my answer.

The Planning Authority (PA) always seem to be making the headlines for the wrong reasons, the Environment and Resource Authority (ERA) is nowhere to be seen, and trees are facing the chop incessantly.

We are outraged when historical sites are taken from us to build more apartments or when road-widening projects entail cutting down mature trees… but we are also used to it.

The public outcry against over-development in Malta has been ignored for far too long, the peak of which was reached when environmentalist and Moviment Graffitti representative Karen Tanti was literally muted while voicing concerns during an online sitting regarding the construction of 18 apartments on an archaeological site in Kalkara. The development was undoubtedly approved.

It has well been established that the PA has its own agenda by which it operates, completely ignoring environmental and historical factors when taking decisions, but to mute a concerned environmentalist giving valid reasons why the development should not proceed is disgraceful and arrogant to say the least.

If the decision is taken prior to the sitting, the sitting is ultimately rendered useless, giving a delusive perspective that the outcome can be swayed. A board of traitors should not be allowed to make such consequential decisions, ruining our island as they please.

The archaeological site in Kalkara is (or should I say was?) very dear to many local citizens as it gives a sense of historic pride. The farmhouse that was in the area was illegally demolished back in February, ostensibly to pave the way for this project; although one must wonder whether the word ‘illegally’ holds any value in our sorry situation.

A very old carob tree will be uprooted and historic cart ruts are to be cemented over, not to mention the tadpole shrimp population which will ultimately suffer from habitat loss. This species is essentially one of the oldest species on the planet, virtually unchanged when compared to its fossils dating back 200 million years. Several populations of this precious species have been lost across Europe due to habitat destruction and it is now considered endangered.

Worthless facts if you ask the PA, however, their priorities have been scrambled long ago it seems! Just as the PA’s priorities, ERA’s mission statement also baffles me: “To safeguard the environment for a sustainable quality of life.” Had I not read it, I would not have believed it! I always found it astounding how the ‘the national regulator on the environment’ has never been outspoken with such high-priority issues… but it seems to be another unfortunate thing that everyone has gotten used to.

The public outcry against over-development in Malta has been ignored for far too long- Francesca Grillo

One of my last assignments for the academic term was to thoroughly analyse an environmental-related issue we face in Malta. I felt quite passionate about over-development and urbanisation because a lot of other worrying issues are interrelated. Presently, Malta has the highest proportion of built-up land area when compared to any other EU member state, standing at 33 per cent.

Proper planning is, therefore, of utmost importance due to the island’s already small surface area, anything less than proper planning is simply unsustainable. The PA, however, seems to think otherwise and would prefer to prioritise the economy rather than public health and safety. Economic growth and multiculturalism are perhaps the only benefits to overdevelopment, and when experienced in excess, they too have their downfalls.

On the other hand, the aforementioned analysis gave me some time to think properly about what overdevelopment really meant to the Maltese islands, and although most repercussions were already quite obvious to me, the resulting long list of disadvantages still took me by surprise. It occurred to me that several issues occur on a wider scale and cannot be attributable to one apartment block, one hotel or one building.

The urban heat island effect, stress, air pollution and class discrimination, therefore, cannot be solely accredited to the 18 future apartments to be built on the archaeological site in Kalkara, so when considering whether they should be approved, they only consider what they can truly be held accountable for; an immoral and short-term view that is undermining the country.

Chemical intoxication, biodiversity loss, freshwater scarcity, excess waste production, noise pollution, loss of a sense of community, increased crime rates, flooding and corruption are some of the related disadvantages.

Most of those sound familiar, right? They should not. And just because they do, they still should not be acceptable in any way, shape or form. Just because the reasoning behind this particular development sounds familiar due to a plethora of other developments that have been passed previously, it still does not make it acceptable.

Just because we have been stressed for all too long because of traffic, bad air quality and the continuous cacophony of drills, cranes and jackhammers, it is still not admissible.

These factors shape our lives on a daily basis, and not in a good way. If it mattered enough to us that politicians would stop getting elected over it, things would be different. This, therefore, is my plead to stop being familiar with unacceptable conditions and decisions

because this same familiarity is also the nemesis of our sustainable future.

When you start getting too comfortable, remember Huxley’s words “familiarity breeds indifference”.

Francesca Grillo is reading for a degree in Earth Systems Science.