Updated February 22 with Infrastructure Malta reply
Given my predilection to use a private vehicle in a prolific way, I thought of kicking off the column with a proviso which lays bare my stake as a motorist in the current state of the national road infrastructure
I am confident that, upon launching a tirade against the current road-widening frenzy, I would be duly reminded by Infrastructure Malta, where I fail to point it out myself, that I am ‘part of the problem’ in that I am contributing to any potential traffic congestion on the island and that road-widening is necessary for avid motorists like myself.
With that off my chest, we can start addressing proposed road-widening projects which are a tad (to put it mildly) less easily justifiable, notably the proposed lunacy for the Victoria-Marsalforn stretch, where an estimated 300 roadside trees and 11,000 square metres of agricultural land will be impinged upon and for which an EIA study (which would have definitely slowed down matters) was not deemed necessary.
The context of such a proposed road-widening is diametrically opposed to the one relevant to the Central Link project, for instance, which was marketed as the necessary evil to bite the Attard and Mrieħel traffic congestion bullet. In fact, as rightly pointed out by Gozitan and Maltese motorists familiar with the Marsalforn road stretch, traffic congestion along its extent is a figment of the imagination such that it surely cannot be used as the motivation to plough ahead with such a proposal.
So much so that the Gozo ministry makes reference to “occasional congestion” problems for the same stretch. It would have been useful if the traffic flow data used by the ministry to reach such an assessment were to be published in order to further understand the ‘need’ for the proposed road-widening.
Probably, in a straw-clutching attempt, the Gozo ministry and Infrastructure Malta will counter that the proposal will create a 2.5m-wide cycling and foot path, probably underscoring the contribution to the EcoGozo approach, and that the same stretch is in dire need of repairs. The mind boggles at this stage – do roads in need of surfacing/patching up actually need to be concomitantly widened?
Detractors of the proposed road-widening works will be accused of being uninformed and of harbouring some covert partisan agenda- Alan Deidun
One can infer a number of emerging patterns and trends from the strategy being adopted by Infrastructure Malta in recent months in a bid to placate the seething anger and exasperation triggered by its proposals.
These include Infrastructure Malta’s inclination to rope in third parties as the proponents of road-widening projects, such as is the case for the Victoria-Marsalforn stretch, for which the agency was quick to point to the fact that the application was submitted by the Gozo ministry, thus deflecting criticism.
Secondly, there is a considerable budget allocated for road-widening projects and such a prodigious budget needs to be spent, in one way or another.
Thirdly, where possible, an aggressive compensatory tree-transplantation and planting approach is being peddled by the Infrastructure Malta, culminating in statistics disseminated prominently (even during the evening news bulletin on the national TV station) showing increasing annual numbers of roadside trees bestowed to the community by Infrastructure Malta.
Additional creativity is applied occasionally in the case of trees which cannot be saved, such that the same individuals are sick or dead, with the occurrence of alien or even invasive tree species seen as an opportunity to pounce upon.
Occasionally, for proposals which are met with the most vociferous resistance, additional concessions are made, such as the pledge to reuse 3,000 square metres of soil which would need to be excavated to make way for the superfluous works.
Fourthly, in case of road stretches being widened which also need repairs/patching up, the latter point will be driven home through the publication of eloquent images in the media showing the ‘dangerous state’ the same stretch lies in and the hazard it poses to motorists.
Last, but definitely not least, detractors of the proposed road-widening works will be accused of being uninformed, of not having consulted the latest plans (this treatment was meted out to none other than former prime minister Alfred Sant following his criticism of proposals for Mrieħel) and of harbouring some covert partisan agenda.
Farmers who place spokes in the wheels might even be accused of being impersonators, of having nothing to do with farming per se or, at least, of being ‘non-genuine farmers’ (whatever that means). The waters will be muddled further through conflicting reports that the works in question do not require permits from competent authorities (since they are covered by the perfunctory DNO process) or that all permits are in hand for such works to proceed.
Is Infrastructure Malta genuinely expecting John Citizen to regularly head down to the Planning Authority to scrutinise road-widening plans lest he is accused of being uninformed and, thus, reneging on his right to speak out against proposals which might negatively and irreversibly affect his quality of life?
Infrastructure Malta replies
Infrastructure Malta is not in any way involved in this proposal or any related works and plans. This project is not simply being proposed by the Ministry for Gozo. It is being wholly planned and implemented by the Ministry.
All road works in Gozo are managed and implemented by the Ministry for Gozo and not by Infrastructure Malta.