From Seaside Charm to Concrete Jungle
Sliema and its neighbouring towns—St. Julian’s and Gżira—have become the business and commercial heart of Malta. While that may sound like progress, the reality for residents tells a different story. What was once a peaceful seaside town known for its Victorian charm and Art Deco elegance has now been transformed into a dense urban sprawl, choked with high-rise apartments, relentless traffic, and unregulated commercial activity.
Plots of land once housing a single family now accommodate ten to fifteen households. Many of these are short-term lets, offices, or multi-car households, but few buildings offer enough garage space. Congestion has become unbearable. And while residents are expected to adjust, the government continues to favour business development over liveability.
Economic Growth Without Balance
For over a decade under the Labour government, the pace of development has been relentless. Sliema—already densely built—has been pushed to breaking point. The government’s focus has been on enabling growth and attracting business, while the needs of residents have been ignored.
A glaring example of this disregard was the suspension of the residential parking scheme—one of the government’s earliest decisions. In a locality where space is already scarce, residents suddenly found themselves in a daily struggle to find parking, competing with office workers, diners, delivery vans, and tourists. The resulting frustration is not only understandable—it was entirely predictable.
Local Councils Undermined
Local councils, the level of government closest to the people, have found themselves increasingly sidelined. Under Labour, there has been a clear trend of eroding local authority and replacing it with regional structures that lack sensitivity to local needs.
The 2024 Social Impact Assessment made this flaw painfully clear. Sliema was grouped with Birkirkara, Għargħur, and Lija—localities with very different challenges. Despite the quality of the academic work, the study’s relevance was diluted, and its findings have since been ignored.This kind of centralised approach does nothing for the residents who live with the consequences of poor planning every day.
A Questionable Motion from Labour
Against this backdrop, it’s difficult not to be cynical when Labour councillor Ryan Borg presents a motion for a Carrying Capacity Study just days after PN leader Dr. Bernard Grech announced a similar initiative. The timing alone suggests political opportunism. Mr. Borg even took to social media, claiming credit and implying Dr. Grech should have acknowledged his initiative. But gestures mean little when they come from representatives of the same party that caused the crisis in the first place.
Mr. Borg has also accused the Sliema Local Council—led by Mayor John Pillow and other PN representatives—of failing to cooperate with the government on reinstating residential parking. This, despite the fact that it was Labour that suspended the scheme in the first place. The council has, in fact, long advocated for its return. It is not cooperation that has been lacking—it’s government interest.
The Problem with the Motion Itself
Even the motion itself raises eyebrows. It includes no costing, no implementation plan, and suggests that the council should bear the financial burden. A second version of the motion had previously proposed a cost-sharing arrangement with the government and was expected to be presented alongside the mayor. But that plan was scrapped, and instead, a new version was tabled—seconded by the Labour minority leader.
Why the sudden shift? And what does it say about Labour’s sincerity?
A Responsible PN-Led Council
As a PN-majority council, we cannot accept a motion that asks us to pay for a study likely to be ignored, just like the 2024 Social Impact Assessment. If such a study is to be meaningful, it must be funded by the government. Only then can we hope it will be treated with the seriousness it deserves.
The claim that the council has the money to fund this alone is misleading. Our financial stability is the result of prudent management and responsible budgeting by previous PN-led administrations. These funds exist to serve residents, not to be wasted on motions designed for political theatre.
Our Position: Study, But Only With Commitment
Nevertheless, we are not against the idea of a Carrying Capacity Study. In fact, we see it as necessary. But it must be done right—led in good faith, funded properly, and tailored to Sliema’s specific situation. And most importantly, it must lead to action. Studies that sit on shelves serve no one.
Moving Forward for Sliema
Our commitment remains clear: to defend the quality of life in Sliema and to resist attempts to reduce the town to a commercial free-for-all. We will continue to advocate for planning that serves residents, not just developers and business owners. This town deserves better—and so do the people who call it home.
No comments:
Post a Comment