This is the second article in a two-part series. Read part one. 

The Future of Malta’s Property Market conference held last month brought together some of the brightest heads of the sector, their sharpest suits and their darkest dreams.

And some glum realities too: the KPMG study commissioned by the MDA (which includes estate agents under its wing) confirmed that the average Maltese household cannot afford to buy a property in its own country, with prices set to rise in tandem with building materials.

Sandro Chetcuti, now head of Property Malta, (the website comes in English, Chinese or Russian) called for a revision of the local plans, accompanied by the usual “sustainability”, “long-term vision” and “better planning”.

The eminent Joseph Portelli descended to say the problems are prices and a “lack of public open spaces” but scorned notions of overdevelopment and called for higher buildings.

The local plans have often been kicked about like a ragged football in a muddy favela.

On the one hand, the government insists that local plans cannot be changed whenever it’s cornered by popular anger, as with, say, Ħondoq ir-Rummien, or the Marsascala marina saga, another bay that should become public domain.

On its part, the construction lobby is loudly angling for a revision of these plans. Michael Stivala, too, was on record saying the local plans should accommodate more storeys.

That local plans cannot change is an outright lie: Labour set to “right Nationalist wrongs” by widening development boundaries in 2014, while tweaks and tricks have happened across the island, for example in Dingli.

Moreover, the oft-quoted right to develop land is far from absolute: if this were true, ODZ land would simply not exist.

It was also interesting to hear Portelli and Stivala recite from the same hymnbook, in spite of their apparent distance. Their interests are similar, their modus operandi not too different and they are also brought together by their favourite lobbyist.

Joseph Muscat was elected at the helm of the Malta Premier League earlier this year, backed by Portelli and other presidents. The two would schmooze and smile at a club on occasion of the feast of St Cajetan, a good opportunity for the Gozitan magnate to show his pal how he, too, gets godlike adulation for standing in a balcony.

There are tangible advantages for a developer in being represented by the man whose administrations blew open the gates for overdevelopment. He who “reduced bureaucracy at the PA” is the strongest warhorse they can saddle, thanks to his knowledge of inner workings, events and personnel and the loyalty he evidently commends from swathes of the public administration right up to cabinet.

Muscat recently appeared on Lovin Malta, merely days after this paper reported how the former prime minister is a consultant for Stivala; one of 300 mouths fed by the hotelier. He stated what Stivala cannot without being laughed at: Sliema is ugly, but only because townhouses were destroyed in the nineties and noughties.

Then, some self-flattery and chest-thumping, with Muscat claiming he made Malta a richer country, one where most of its population can’t afford the tiny apartments built instead of houses, demolished by his policies.

This stunting is merely testing the ground for whatever it is they’re planning for Townsquare, which Stivala purchased a year ago for a reported €70 million.

Despite the gung-ho, mentions of Muscat get his client’s dander up. Recently, he lashed out with a libel at Arnold Cassola after the latter claimed Muscat’s consultancy is “payback” for planning concessions to Stivala during his tenure as prime minister.

The local plans have often been kicked about like a ragged football in a muddy favela- Wayne Flask

It’s hard to fault Cassola for his reasoning: he was merely saying what too many people believe about the whole lobby and its incest with the political class; the Stivala-Muscat case is but another case of revolting doors.

Moreover, Muscat resigned after protests in the streets (and from businesses) at his administration’s involvement in the assassination of a journalist and the FATF greylisting that followed was a result of his government’s cavalier approach to dirty money in our orbit.

The hideous Gżira lido, which took a sizeable chunk of the promenade from the public, was handed to a consortium including Stivala, without a public call.

But faced with this assertion, the pastor blew his lid and claimed that “certain NGOs pretend to be NGOs so that they could make money” and that “there are big businesses behind certain NGOs”.

He fell short of mentioning any names, coming across as a Breitbart conspiracist who growls “Soros” every time someone wearing dreadlocks walks past.

Perhaps, he’s mixed up “NGOs” with “foundations”, a popular topic among the spouses of a few politicians. You’d find the odd oligarch on the board and, unlike registered NGOs, foundations could even escape the sonar. But I think I know who he’s referring to.

As his predecessor’s repeated, candid admissions confirmed, developers donate to the perennially indebted political parties. Their return for investing in Muscat’s moviment was a spate of pro-development planning policies including the heinous DC2015, scores of underhanded land concessions, complete deregulation and even incentives for the upgrade of machinery.

Besides this, the MDA received €240,000 in funds from the Muscat administration between 2014 and 2018, money in part meant for voluntary organisations such as those working with exploited migrants.

Stivala himself confirmed the MDA is registered as a non-profit organisation, just like those he tried to tarnish. Here is an “NGO pretending to be an NGO” so that its members could make money, an “NGO with big business (and government funding) behind it”.

Stivala may not have been known outside Gżira before the last few years but Planning Authority statistics confirm his group’s aggressive invasion of other towns, bearing its trademark disregard for residents and surroundings alike.

One wonders what massacres are to ensue if Gejges Khan and his rebranded army of Mongols get their way with the local plans.

Stivala can bumble all the tin-foil allegations he likes; they won’t defuse the righteous anger at his deeds and at the representatives of the people enabling his lobby’s greed.

Bullying and hypocrisy must, and will, be countered with resistance and truth: this is a guarantee no bank will give, not even to Stivala.