Patrick Galea, Iklin.
Paul Abela of the GRTU (Push On With Golf Course,
August 17) seems to think that Malta is made up of nincompoops. He
mimics the same justifications that have been machine-gunned at us over
the last five years.
Mr Abela says that a golf course would further
develop the "Maltese tourism product". What he does not do is explain
how.
How is Malta, with the addition of a golf course,
going to compete with the hundreds of golf courses available in
countries around the Mediterranean? Why would any sane golfer come for
a golfing holiday in a country with no choice in golf courses when he
can go to countries where the choice is endless?
It would indeed make more sense if Malta marketed
itself as offering something unique, as opposed to something ordinary.
How seriously have ideas like eco-tourism been taken?
Mr Abela adds: "The positives of these new
investments are by far greater than the negatives." Whose positives is
he referring to? I am sure those involved in the "development" will see
this as a win-win situation. The problem is that their chief interest
is in maximising profits and not in the well-being of the population,
irrespective of how hard they try to convince us otherwise.
Giving away a massive tract of land the size of
Sliema and putting it up for development means robbing the present and
future generations of the few remaining open areas available on the
island. The rich flora and fauna of the area should be treasured as
part of our natural heritage, not destroyed. Moreover, the excessive
amount of water needed to sustain a golf course in a climate like ours
is already enough reason to reject any golf course proposal. The
wasting of two scarce resources in a country with such limited
resources is obscene and should not even be considered.
It is very short-sighted to view the quality of
life as depending solely on the continuous degrading of land and
destruction of landscapes, euphemistically called development. One
however wouldn't expect anything different from somebody who seems to
suggest that money should replace all our principles and be the only
guiding force for our actions.
No, money does not grow on trees; but open spaces
are not withdrawn from ATMs either. If Mr Abela enjoys taking walks and
having picnics in the bank, the majority of the population prefers the
countryside. Mr Abela can, in the meantime, inform us about how he
proposes to tackle desertification and drought when water becomes
short. This is already occurring in countries like Portugal, Spain and
Greece where golf courses are abundant. How does he propose to tackle
such a problem in Malta? So far I haven't managed to get one drop of
water from squeezing my Maltese liri notes. Maybe I'm doing something
wrong. It would be great if Mr Abela can enlighten me, and the Maltese
population, on the correct procedure in turning the money that doesn't
grow on trees into water and land.
Golf course blues(2)
Alan Deidun, Birkirkara.
Conrad Vella's letter (The Golf Course, August
17) is another failed attempt at buoying the golfing cause. He states
in a very confident manner that the golf course will boost the economy,
while failing to quote any sources or hard data for his jovial mood.
Can he provide hard facts (not suppositions) as
to why the golf course is beneficial or not rather than labelling me as
a fundamentalist? I have been providing such facts ad nauseam, week in,
week out. I am fed up of hearing the monicker "fundamentalist" being
uttered in such a deriding fashion - hence, I will propose a monicker
myself: "Pseudo-Progress Proponent" (PPP) which aptly applies to all
pro-golfers.
It is interesting to quote within the context a
recent paper by James Miller (published in August 2005 in the journal
Trends In Ecology And Evolution): "Biodiversity loss is a matter of
great concern among conservation scientists, but the wherewithal to
reverse this trend is generally lacking. One reason is that nearly half
of the world's people live in urban areas and are increasingly
disconnected from nature."
Environmentalists give the impression of
"objecting to absolutely everything" simply because they are the only
ones to continuously monitor natural resources in the country, while
most members of the public are oblivious to the current loss of assets
through construction, etc, through their very rare forays to the
countryside. Hence the objective of organising walks for the public at
Xaghra l-Hamra and Ta' Cenc.
I thank Mr Vella for proposing my involvement in
the project but, as I am already doing, I do get involved in projects
but only where natural landscapes and habitats are preserved integrally
and not as part of a chequered jigsaw of golfing lawns and garigue.
Singapore, with a comparable population density
to Malta's, has preserved a sizeable rainforest patch (not dabbled with
in any way), just to reminisce about the lost landscapes of this small
state. With the current rate at which we are opening inroads, even in
the most remote places on our islands, one would have to make reference
to artistic impressions or the nostalgic black and white photos of
bygone times to get a glimpse of Malta's past landscapes.
Every week brings fresh hilarity and the GRTU is
a frequent supplier of such pearls of wisdom. Its president, Paul
Abela, states that "This (the creation of jobs) would not have happened
if Malta had depended on the many weaklings around us".
Mr Abela should know quite well that it takes
much more stamina to fight the system and the established institutions
than simply regurgitating the political manifestos of the two political
parties in the country.
But the icing on the cake has to be this: "Golf
courses embellish the environment, make the economy grow further and
give us a better quality of life". It would be interesting to know the
studies consulted by the GRTU in arriving at the conclusion that "golf
courses embellish the environment". Does embellishment comprise the
doing away with the circa 400 to 500 garigue plant species for just one
or two alien turf species, or the scourging of a pristine landscape?
Maybe the EIA team could put to good use Mr
Abela's statements since he seems quite conversant with the subject.
Golf course blues(3)
Joseph Zammit, Attard.
Paul Abela is the epitome of arrogance.
He flatly decides to ignore the opinion of a
significant portion of the Maltese population, who don't have the
financial clout of the big "developer", deeming it fit to call them
"the many weaklings around us" and "the faint-hearted". What he fails
to see is that such people have at heart not only the economical
well-being of the country but also its cultural and natural well-being.
Luckily for us, not all Maltese are like Mr
Abela, who seems to think that we can live on money alone; not everyone
thinks that a tract of natural land is there to be developed for the
pleasure of a few rather than the enjoyment of all. Yes, many people
like me put great value on Malta's natural environment. It is part of
our standard of living and feeling of well-being to have access to
naturally beautiful and quiet spots to spend time in and get away from
the hubbub of everyday life.
Mr Abela assumes that because he was ignorant
about where Xaghra l-Hamra was before the golf course proposal was
made, so were the rest of the Maltese. I bet he doesn't even know why
it is called Xaghra l-Hamra. Has Mr Abela been there, not just by car,
but really walked around, observed, admired and enjoyed? Does he spend
hours every week in such natural environments all around the island,
like I and many like-minded people do? I bet his idea of a relaxing
walk is on the Sliema front "admiring" the many construction sites
while bumping into other people.
Mr Abela even says that "future generations will
look at these newer investments and be proud once again of the
achievement of us Maltese", referring to the Xaghra l-Hamra and Ta'
Cenc golf course proposals.
I ask, what would the Maltese have achieved?
Another white elephant, another important piece of natural heritage
lost forever, never to be recovered. What will our future generations
have to look at? Nothing but developed land, which once was peaceful,
natural, and accessible for everyone's enjoyment. They will never be
able to enjoy our islands as we have.
"Golf courses embellish the environment," Mr
Abela says! In what ways, may I ask? If he thinks that a Sliema-sized
lawn is an environmental embellishment, unless he's considering
Maghtab, then think again. If he really believes that the garigue is a
wasteland, then he should go and look closely for himself. He'll find a
diversity of plant and animal life that no golf course can offer, apart
from the garigue being a typical Maltese environment, which a golf
course certainly isn't.
So, contrary to what Mr Abela insists, let our
leaders listen to everyone's opinions. The majority of Maltese don't
have the financial power to influence decisions and finance projects,
but they have their voice and an equal right to decide the country's
future.
• Up • Elephants • The Myth • Garigue in Malta • Not Viable • Golf Logic • The Debate • Med Flora • Sacrifice • Who Pays? • Broken Promises • Building Starts • Suspicious • Wide Angle Alternatives • Good for the syndicate • Constitutional right to enjoyment of environment • Talking Point • Asking the right questions • Golfcourse Blues • A sign of things to come • Protect our open spaces •
