Why I Am Supporting Dr. Alex Borg

 My endorsement for Dr. Alex Borg stems from the belief that he is the only candidate capable of delivering genuine reform within the party, particularly in how we communicate the PN's message. While he has put forward a wide range of proposals, the way these ideas are presented is just as important as their content. The era of beating around the bush, fiery rhetoric, and long-winded explanations at activities is over. Today, people want clear, concise messages supported by more detailed documents they can access and review. Too often, lengthy speeches are mistaken for substance, when in truth they add little value. What people truly want are politicians who listen to them and whose policies genuinely reflect their needs. This is precisely what Dr. Borg offers.

Resistance to change is often the first reaction, and at times this resistance is little more than a strategy to score political points. Dr. Borg has put forward a number of proposals aimed at strengthening the party structurally. Yet during the debate, it was Dr. Adrian Delia who argued that the statute does not allow such reforms. This creates the impression that the party exists to serve the statute, rather than the statute serving the party. Blocking reform on such grounds is both self-defeating and stifling, it certainly does not help the PN move forward.

One example is Dr. Borg’s proposal for the PN to appoint a CEO responsible for the party’s commercial affairs, thus allowing the Secretary General to dedicate more time to his political role. Critics, including Dr. Delia during the first debate, twisted this into an accusation that Dr. Borg wants to diminish the role of the Secretary General, when in fact his goal is to strengthen it. Furthermore, Dr. Borg strongly supports decentralizing the leadership structure, including empowering the Deputy Leader, in order to make the party more effective.

It is worth recalling that during Dr. Simon Busuttil’s leadership, reforms of this nature were carried out without the statute serving as an obstacle. For this reason, the claim, started by Dr. Delia in the debate that Dr. Borg’s reforms cannot materialize because they are blocked by the statute is nothing more than spin, repeated endlessly in the hope that people will start to believe it.

As leader, Dr. Borg will ensure that our party becomes more inclusive, embracing people from all walks of life. He firmly believes that the PN should be a home for anyone who wishes to contribute toward a better Malta. His proposals reflect this vision, ranging from social reforms that support young people striving to buy their first home, to measures that address the needs of pensioners born before 1962. Moreover, he recognizes the urgent need for a comprehensive development plan that safeguards our environment and secures a better future for the country.

These elections are the PN’s chance to truly regenerate itself, and we must not let this opportunity slip away. I appeal to all tesserati who have not yet voted, or who remain undecided, to place their trust in Dr. Alex Borg, for the future of our party and our country.

 

 

Building a Sustainable Malta: Preserving Land, Livelihoods, and Legacy

We are living in a time when Malta’s environment is under increasing strain. Air quality is deteriorating, green spaces are shrinking, and the balance between rapid development and the wellbeing of citizens is all but lost. Yet, we cannot ignore that construction plays a crucial role in our economy. It generates employment, creates wealth, and supports a range of industries. The challenge, therefore, is not whether to build, but how 
we build—and at what cost to our environment and quality of life.

Can sustainable development truly be achieved in a country with limited space? Can a construction industry flourish while respecting our landscapes, heritage, and community needs? The answer is yes—but only if we adopt long-term thinking, careful planning, and a clear vision of the Malta we wish to leave to future generations.

We must ask ourselves: Do we want a country overwhelmed by buildings, where human wellbeing is secondary to profit? Or do we aim for a future in which quality takes precedence over quantity—where development is shaped by today’s challenges and tomorrow’s hopes?

The time has come to re-evaluate our policies and align them with sustainability, liveability, and national interest. A first step is to carry out a comprehensive assessment of every town and village. This means drawing up a detailed inventory of buildings—whether occupied or not—and, crucially, evaluating their historical and aesthetic value. Such a database would guide local planning, preservation, and regeneration strategies.

Each locality should be required to develop its own open space plan, proportionate to its size and character. Urban areas need forestation and recreational zones to support the health and wellbeing of residents. Abandoned or derelict buildings must be addressed. Owners should be given a clear choice: restore and repurpose, or, where no historical or architectural value exists, allow for replacement—but only following review by an expert aesthetic commission.

Rather than endlessly expanding into untouched land, the construction sector should shift focus toward renewal—revitalising what already exists. There is ample scope for development through restoration and adaptive reuse, ensuring that the industry remains active while protecting our limited land resources.

Public land within development zones that lies abandoned or underutilised should be transformed into public gardens and green areas. Here, the private sector can play a valuable role—working in partnership with government to create accessible spaces filled with endemic trees, play areas, and places for community life. Government should also consider acquiring privately owned land where necessary to expand public green infrastructure. A greener Malta is not just an environmental aspiration—it is a national priority.

This vision must also extend to our rural areas. The future of Maltese agriculture depends not only on financial support—such as EU funds through the Rural Development Programme—but also on robust policies that prevent misuse of farmland. Too often, plots cultivated for generations are being sold to buyers with no real farming intentions, who then repurpose them into private retreats or pseudo-agritourism venues.

To stop this trend, government must introduce legal safeguards that define “active farming” and restrict the transfer of agricultural land to non-farmers, except under strict regulatory review. Loopholes allowing farmland to be disguised as recreational property must be closed. A national register of agricultural land should be created to monitor ownership and usage, with regular inspections of land benefitting from public support. Where abuse is found, enforcement and penalties must follow.

If Malta is to move forward with dignity, we must make deliberate choices—choices that prioritise long-term wellbeing over short-term gain. Our future depends on how we use the land we have, how we value our environment, and how seriously we take our responsibility to preserve what is left—for ourselves, and for those yet to come.

A Time for Renewal: Reimagining the Nationalist Party for Malta's Future

Malta finds itself at a pivotal crossroads — a moment not merely for reflection, but for renewal. After years under the same administration, many feel a sense of fatigue and disillusionment, as though meaningful change has slipped out of reach. Yet it is precisely in such times of widespread resignation that the opportunity for reinvention becomes most vital.

For the Nationalist Party (PN), this is more than a political challenge; it is a historic opportunity to reimagine itself as a modern, centrist force rooted in credibility, compassion, and vision. The party must present clear, practical alternatives to the status quo — alternatives that inspire trust and reignite the belief that better is possible. The current situation is not the best we can expect, and a higher quality of life is not a utopian dream. It is within our grasp.

To truly become a vehicle for progress, however, the PN must also undergo a fundamental shift in how it views Malta’s evolving identity, particularly in relation to immigration. The legacy of immigration should not be seen through a lens of fear or as a burden, but rather as an opportunity — a chance to enrich our islands economically, culturally, and socially.

This calls for a decisive break from the current government's model of cosmopolitanism, which is largely transactional, driven by short-term economic interests, and indifferent to the deeper needs of national cohesion. Instead, we must embrace a more meaningful form of cosmopolitanism — one grounded in cultural dialogue, mutual respect, and shared growth.

This deeper integration cannot be imposed from above. It must be organic and respectful of Malta’s cultural continuity. New influences should be woven gradually into our national narrative, not forced upon it. A living culture must evolve naturally, absorbing those elements that resonate with its core, while leaving others to be explored in time, if and when the collective story is ready to embrace them.

Investment in community-driven cultural initiatives will be key to fostering this mutual understanding. The PN can lead the way by championing policies that bring communities together — not just geographically, but socially and spiritually. Integration must become a process of enrichment, not erasure.

At the same time, the PN must speak clearly and boldly about the issues that weigh most heavily on people’s everyday lives. Affordable housing should not feel like a lost cause. The unchecked, chaotic construction that has consumed much of our landscape must be brought to an end. These are not unsolvable problems. Real, workable solutions are possible — but they require leadership with the courage to prioritise long-term well-being over short-term profit.

Under the current Labour administration, the economy appears dangerously over-reliant on mass immigration and speculative development. We are led to believe that without an endless influx of cheap labour and constant building, our economy would collapse. But this is a false dichotomy. Sustainability and prosperity can — and must — go hand in hand.

Nowhere is this imbalance more visible than in our tourism model. While tourism remains a critical sector, the focus on mass tourism — particularly nightlife-oriented and short-term rentals — has eroded the quality of life for residents. Malta is too often sold as a party destination, creating the illusion of a country in perpetual celebration. Meanwhile, communities are left to deal with noise, overcrowding, rising rents, and a sense that their voices no longer matter.

The PN must challenge this model and advocate for a more sustainable, community-conscious tourism strategy — one that values both the visitor and the resident, and that prioritises cultural and environmental integrity over fast profit.

This is the moment for the Nationalist Party to redefine itself — not only as an electoral alternative but as a beacon of hope and responsibility. By embracing a forward-looking, centrist vision that promotes cultural inclusion, sustainable development, and social justice, the PN can once again become a party that not only responds to the needs of today but lays the foundations for a better tomorrow.

Change is not only necessary — it is still possible.

Tradition, Sovereignty, and Renewal: A New Path for the Nationalist Party

Between Tradition and Renewal: The PN’s Struggle for Relevance in a Changing Malta

The Malta Today results did not come as a surprise to the PN—it was actually anticipated. Current trends appear to be working against the party. Despite a decline in quality of life due to the country's overcrowding, the economy continues to perform well. In such circumstances, it is difficult for any opposition to succeed without the creativity needed to overcome the situation. To make matters worse for the PN, the party's financial situation appears to be a central factor contributing to its current troubles. Another challenge for the party is finding a centre ground that aligns with its identity—one that doesn’t alienate its grassroots supporters while still appealing to new voters. Striking this balance is no easy task. A party that has succeeded in attracting both liberal and Catholic voters—much like during the tenure of Eddie Fenech Adami—must now find common ground, positioning itself as a conservative party capable of representing a wide spectrum of society.

 

Reclaiming Public Services: Restoring Integrity, Sovereignty, and Social Responsibility

The PN should firmly assert that essential services must remain under state control, because unlike private companies, the state has no profit motive—its only responsibility is to serve the needs of the people. It is unacceptable that €400 million were lost in deals like those with Vitals and Steward, when those funds could have been used to improve the lives of the most vulnerable, particularly the sick. A strong, publicly run hospital system ensures that patients receive care based on need, not profit, and keeps corrupt business interests out of healthcare.

In many countries, people take pride in their national health services—pride that has been eroded in Malta under a Labour government. The PN must show the people that this pride can be restored, and that Malta can once again have a healthcare system that works for everyone.

But it’s not just healthcare. The energy sector has also been compromised. Is it really acceptable that 33% of Enemalta is owned by a Chinese state company? To make matters worse, this deal has been mired in allegations of offshore accounts, kickbacks, and shady dealings. It’s possible that the country lost €7.4 million and $5 million through these arrangements—money that should have gone into improving our energy infrastructure, not lining the pockets of the few.

And beyond the financial loss, there is a deeper concern: a foreign government, through its state-owned enterprises, now holds influence over Malta’s electricity supply. This raises serious questions about sovereignty, transparency, and long-term national interest. The PN must commit to regaining control of our essential services, restoring accountability, and putting the Maltese people—not foreign states or corrupt business networks—at the heart of public policy.

A Vision for Sustainable Growth and National Renewal

The PN must put forward a clear, forward-looking plan for Malta—one that directly addresses the problems created by Labour’s economic model, which has favoured quantity over quality. What the country needs is a strategy focused on sustainable growth, improved infrastructure, and a renewed commitment to preserving both our environment and cultural heritage.

This plan should include the creation of new open spaces in overdeveloped urban areas and the protection of our rural landscapes from further degradation. A more environmentally conscious approach—clearly defined and professionally guided—would show that the PN is serious about long-term quality of life, not just short-term gains.

Equally important is addressing the country’s growing traffic crisis. The PN must champion a strong public transport strategy, developed in consultation with experts in the field, to provide efficient and reliable alternatives to private car use. Reducing congestion and pollution must be a core part of this vision.

At the heart of this plan should be a shift in economic direction: away from a system reliant on imported cheap labour, and towards one that prioritises high-quality, well-paid jobs. New economic projects should aim to attract innovation, talent, and investment that uplifts the country, not strains its resources.

This kind of model will not only raise living standards, but will also ease the pressure on our population by discouraging unsustainable growth. It offers a more balanced future—one that delivers opportunities for citizens and foreign residents alike, while restoring dignity and direction to the national economy.

Balancing Belief and Progress: A Pragmatic Path for the PN

 The PN has long grappled with the challenge of balancing the support of its traditional Catholic base with that of more liberal-minded voters. To remain relevant and representative, the party must adopt a pragmatic approach that respects and includes both perspectives.

The PN must position itself as a future government for all—Catholics, people of other faiths, and non-believers alike. It should reflect the diversity of Maltese society, while still acknowledging and respecting the values of its more conservative grassroots. One way to achieve this balance is by introducing the principle of a free vote on matters of personal morality.

It is essential that the party’s parliamentary group includes individuals who represent the broad spectrum of Maltese public opinion—from conservatives to liberals. This ensures that Catholic voters see their views represented, while also allowing space for differing positions. When it comes to matters of conscience, imposing a uniform party line risks alienating those whose convictions are deeply rooted in their faith.

The PN should therefore focus on being an inclusive political movement—one that unites around common policy goals while allowing room for individual freedom on moral issues. The real debate within the party should be centred on political direction, governance, and national priorities—not moral doctrine.

Sliema’s Struggles: Residents Left Behind by a Pro-Business Government

 

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.

Local Councils and their detrioration under a PL government.

  

If we are to understand what local councils are meant to be, not what the PL government has transformed them into; voting for the PN should be everyone's natural choice. It is a known fact that the party that truly believes in importance that local councils have to the lives of people lives is the PN. Contrary to this, the PL government considers local government goes against what their true intention is, which is having more power in their hands to influence elections to their favour. For this reason, under a PL government we are experiencing the erosion of the local council, favoring a system that centralizes power. PL confuses local government with customer care, thus impacting the lives of people with inefficiencies that are avoidable in a truly decentralised system. The efficiency brought by a PN government in 1993 when introducing local council no longer exists, and is replaced with malfunctioning system, which ensures more resources to Labour leaning council as to make them look better. It is a system that runs through the present government and its agencies, one that is intended to trade in influence to the detriment of us all.

 The creation of regional councils was intended at bringing local councils of the same region to work together on projects that benefit that given region. The true purpose of regional councils was however betrayed when they became an excuse for the PL government to strip the local councils of their powers. From garbage collection to environmental management and infrastructural maintenance, these all happen to fall under the regional council. Typically, the PL government have sought to fool people by defining regional councils as one thing only to transform them into something completely different. The ultimate aim of coordinating and supporting local councils within the region was thrown out of the window, only to encroach projects that are supposed to implemented locally. Local councils have been blamed by some for the lack of efficiency in our towns and villages. Yet this lack of efficiency is coming to a large degree from the government, especially the Public Works and Infrastructure Malta. The inefficiency of these two entities has fallen on the lap of the Local Councils, especially those with a PN majority. 

If we are to take, for example, public gardens, their day-to-day maintenance falls under the local councils. However, landscaping projects fall under the responsibility of the Public Works. In other words, renovation in public gardens as is in Independence Gardens in Sliema the local council I form part of falls under  the Public Works. Moreover, public gardens also fall under the Ministry for the Environment, Climate Change and Planning or Parks Malta which is a government agency. Just imagine what the PL government and their agencies wouldn't do to undermine PN Local Councils and in this way fomment an anti-local council environment in the locality. Little do they care that it is we as Sliema residents who are suffering their dirty tricks. Fortunately, however, local councils with a PN majority as is that in Sliema refuse to fall for this kind of trickery, and are always there to put pressure on both Government Agencies and Ministries.

If we take major road works in Malta, these fall under the responsibility of the government agency, Infrastructure Malta. If we consider the way work is done in towns and villages that have a PN majority as is Sliema, one could see only inefficiency at its worst. A case in point is how Infrastructure Malta worked on the High Street in Sliema. There were times when the number of workers on the site did not justify the magnitude of the project. It took way too long for the project to be completed, and not to mention the damage made of people's properties. Had it not been for the pressure that a PN local council made on Infrastructure Malta, especially the Mayor John Pillow, I am pretty sure that the job would be still halfway through till this very day.   

 

Why Voting PN is Good for the Environment

 As we are approach the general election on March 26th, we are faced with two choices that will determine how our country will be governed for the next 5 years. We are either stuck with more of the same with Robert Abela as prime minister, or get the true change that our country needs with Dr. Bernard Grech at the helm of our government. The current brand of Labour politics has been far from innovative, stultified in the past, both in the way that it perceives our relationship as a country with the EU and the rest of  the world, and also  the way that our country is governed in general. The truly progressive party in Malta is the PN, with a track record that speaks for itself, and a electoral program that really caters for our country's needs. Amongst the many progressive pledges, one will find that there is a lot about repairing the environment in the PN's program, which also includes our international obligations with regards global warming.  

A good quality of life is what every government needs to cater for, and it is reasonable to argue that the present government has a horrible record on this regard. The PL government has spent the last 9 years in a construction frenzy, senseless planning, and an unprecedented greed for land and money. The mantra is that whatever makes money is acceptable, which has brought our country to a situation in which it is overcrowded due to imported cheap labour, dirty, and with limited open spaces to enjoy. Although the prime minister promised more open spaces in this campaign, the government's track record is there for all of us to see. On the other hand the PN is serious about making our environment one that people could enjoy. Open spaces are a must in a country that is as densely populated as is ours. With this in mind, the PN is pledging an increase of 50,000 square meters of ODZ land. It is important to create urban open spaces. However, it is wrong to come up with a plan that solely creates man made open spaces, without ensuring the existence of our natural environment as PL does. Moreover, every attempt by the PL government to create open spaces has led to more concrete and bland spaces, as is the main square in Paola among many others. On the other hand ODZ under a PN government is better protected, as what is being pledged is that there is a  need of two thirds of parliament for the development of ODZ land. The involvement of civil society on decisions having to do with the environment is also included in the PNs program, which is a step towards democratizing our environment.    

Reaching a target 80% of our country's carbon emission target by 2030 is another ambitious but needed target that a PN government will achieve. This is a pledge by a prospective PN government that will decrease the number of respiratory diseases, as well as contribute towards the fight against global warming. The PN are committed to reach targets not only for our country, but also for the entire planet. The EU made a commitment under the Paris agreement to the Secretariat of the UN Convention on Climate change to reduce carbon emissions by 55%, the PN is committed to this, because unlike PL their politics is about Malta in a wider world.