One of your main priorities has been building new roads. But studies cited in your own reports show that new roads quickly fill up with displaced or induced traffic. Are we going to spend all this money only to end up in the same situation we are in now?

The complex challenges we are facing with our roads did not start yesterday. There is no single solution. I do not think it is true that widening roads just brings more cars. The Central Link studies showed that if nothing is done, we are approaching gridlock.

I would have loved, when I took over this portfolio, to find a fully-fledged underground system, public transport capable of carrying 70 million passengers, and therefore less need for people to own their own private vehicles. But the situation was different.

We have to solve the problems people are facing now, but we had 78 new cars added to the road every day in 2018. How are you going to address that?

The way to do that is positive measures to encourage people to use other means of transport. If you have 26,000 young people using buses for free, that means they are not using their cars. Some of those may have used the buses anyway, but many of them would probably already have got cars.

We have no plans to introduce measures stopping people from getting their own cars, but we want to offer alternatives. At the same time, certain bottlenecks have to be addressed.

The Central Link study showed that without the project, we will be facing total gridlock. But even with the project, traffic times still will not go down if the growth in cars remains the same.

That is where we have to be intelligent. I criticised the situation we found: no alternative transport solutions and a culture of private car use.

We are winning ourselves some time by solving the bottlenecks. In parallel, we will be taking decisions to ensure that by that time we will have people choosing alternative transport.

Is it worth the cost – in terms of money and in many cases agricultural land – for what is a short-term fix?

These decisions are never easy, but they are not taken lightly. The Central Link project has been on the cards since the 1980s. In 2006, under a Nationalist administration, the authorities concluded again that it had to take place. Against that, you have a group of residents who have always lobbied successfully. That does not work with me. I take decisions.

The project will happen, not just for the good of the people passing from there, but for the good of Attard, Balzan, Lija and Iklin, towns where narrow roads are constantly blocked with people trying to avoid congestion on the main road. I am not happy that fields need to be taken up, but because the road has not yet been built, other areas have been destroyed. 

Are you happy with the efficiency of the public transport system right now?

I am tempted to say I am happy, it should always improve because public transport users are the ones truly helping the situation, not the keyboard warriors getting angry at the minister for uprooting a tree.

How can you expect the most obese nation in Europe to cycle in 35 degree weather?

Our numbers show that reliability has got better. We now have to look at capacity, where we have become victims of our own success. Today people are not complaining about the bus not showing up, they are complaining about it being full. 

How actively are you working on this?

I have asked Transport Malta to carry out an exercise on optimisation and to establish where we need additional capacity. I expect that when we increase capacity we are going to be criticised for increasing subsidies, but when you see the €30 million we pay for an efficient public transport system, it is relatively small compared to the investment in infrastructure.

Cycling advocates have repeatedly raised the problem of lack of infrastructure. Should this be more of a priority?

I do not think the criticism is always valid, especially as there have been projects where we are criticised for increasing cycle lines: a 1.5-metre stretch along several kilometres is what then leads journalists to say we have taken up another football pitch of agricultural land.

I think it is also important that we realise not everyone is ready or able to travel by bike. We should help the portion of the population willing to do so, but we cannot fool ourselves into thinking Malta will ever be Amsterdam. We are not Amsterdam, in climate, culture or geography. How can you expect the most obese nation in Europe to cycle in 35 degree weather?

Do you not think that simply repeating these limitations is just keeping us where we are?

These are facts. If you live and work in Pembroke and St Julian’s, then yes, we should be making it easier for you. But for someone from Mellieħa who works at Smart City, it just does not make sense.

We are going to invest in two cycling routes: one from Mosta to Mater Dei and the University, and another from St Julian’s to Valletta. But it is a difficult balance and one section of road users cannot expect the government to discard other methods of transport to focus on theirs.

You have implemented several incentive schemes for electric vehicles but there has been nearly no take-up. Do you have any hope this will increase?

I think it is like smartphones: other than a few early adopters, people are waiting for the technology to improve. A car is a major investment and people are waiting for the product to get better and cheaper. We cannot offer any more generous incentives, although the time will come when we say you cannot import any more diesel and petrol cars.

Is a phase-out within the next 20 years, as has been suggested, feasible?

I am told the product is expected to get much better in the coming months and years so I expect people to make that choice of their own accord. What is certain is that when the industry sees governments no longer permitting importation of petrol and diesel cars, they will be speeding up the development of their product.

“Certain bottlenecks have to be addressed.” Photo: Jonathan Borg

You are also responsible for planning. Last year, the Planning Authority approved 13,000 new dwellings, more than ever before. People are looking at that and saying it’s a free-for-all.

People applied for those permits.

Are too many being approved?

This is a country that is growing. We’ve made choices as a country. Today we don’t want to do certain types of work; Maltese people no longer aspire to clean the streets, or to work in construction, or bars and restaurants…

There is obviously a construction boom but should the PA be managing or restricting it further?

Can we agree that we are working with Local Plans from 2006? These are the effects of the Local Plans from 2006.

So why don’t we have new ones?

They are being worked on. Those Local Plans should be allowed to develop and mature because at the end of the day they also gave new rights to landowners and property owners.

I think we need to be looking at higher quality projects. This country can take more growth, but it cannot take more low-quality projects. There is space for growth because there is demand for growth. More people are buying homes, more people are investing in property, more people are living and working in Malta. But we need to significantly improve quality.

As you said, we are still working on 2006 local plans. Why have the new plans been delayed so long?

There was an inundation of submissions. The 2006 exercise saw an area the size of Siġġiewi added to the development zone. I would prefer to do nothing than to do that sort of exercise.

This exercise has to be driven by the needs of the country. We need to see how many schools, hospitals, roads, hotels, public spaces, parks, retirement homes we need. This is not something you can do quickly.

Can you put any timeline on it? This legislature?

That would be presumptuous. When it happens it should happen well.

Without the local plans, without a masterplan for places like Paceville, it feels like there is no long-term planning. We are seeing major projects all taking place without a holistic vision.

In Paceville, we have known for a long time that it was designated for the sort of projects we are seeing. What we need, and Transport Malta is working on it, is a transport plan. I am sure Enemalta and Water Services are doing their homework too.

So are you not worried about the consequences of assessing projects one at a time?

I understand that somebody who suddenly finds themselves living next to a construction site will be upset, but the country has chosen to grow

It is happening within the framework of the existing policies. When the PA issued its thoughts on the Paceville masterplan there was not enough engagement with the community and we know how that ended up. Perhaps the public also is not ready for certain difficult decisions.

On a lot of major projects, thousands of objectors, NGOs, local councils will all say their concerns are being ignored. Is the planning process helping the ordinary citizen or only the big developers?

I think the numbers you quoted earlier show that families who want to build or change their home are finding the planning process a help not a hindrance. Obviously someone who has a development happening next door to them will object. But people object for many reasons, even to small projects, and we cannot have a situation where everyone gets their way just because they object.

When you have such a mass of people, even local councils, shouldn’t that carry some weight?

We have given local councils a vote on major projects, and we have seen projects, including tall buildings, that were not approved.

I understand that somebody who suddenly finds themselves living next to a construction site will be upset, but the country has chosen to grow. People do not want to go back to how they were in 2008.

Do you worry that quality of life is going backwards even as the economy grows?

I think there are many areas in which we are not taking advantage as we should be. We kick up a storm when three trees are removed from the middle of the road where they should never have been but then we have, as a country, stopped planting forests. Not everyone can have a garden in front of their door, but let’s make gardens where there’s space for them. Quality of life is having more spaces like Buskett, not having a tree in the middle of the road.

There has been controversy over your own applications for a house and swimming pool on ODZ land. Was this a case of salami slicing? Did you apply for the house and swimming pool separately because they wouldn’t have been approved together?

No. I think together or separately it was all in line with policy and there have been hundreds of other applications like it. This is all about a single person who is obsessed with me and creating a story about everything I do.

The Ombudsman said your decision to file the permit in your project manager’s name was “devious”. 

There were architects who said the Ombudsman was not technically correct. His issue was that I did not apply in my own name, but now I have an objection from the same person saying I only got the permit because I am the minister responsible.

As minister, doesn’t what you do set an example for other developers?

I would be setting a bad example if I had applied for something that was not in line with policy.

As for your own future, with the Prime Minister having said he will step down before the next general election, do you see yourself as a contender for that role?

It is a hypothetical question. The Prime Minister is still there and people, including me, want him to stay.

I am nearly 33, I am a minister with a very large portfolio and when the Prime Minister has shown so much faith in me, it would be wrong of me to concentrate on the future rather than what is in front of me. People expect me to get things done, and that is what I’m going to continue to do.