Light at the end of the tunnel?

MONEY’s Giselle Borg Olivier seeks the views of three key players involved in the Malta-Gozo tunnel debate.

The Malta-Gozo Tunnel Project has been a bone of contention between those who believe that it will be beneficial for commuters, both Maltese and Gozitans, and will boost the tourist trade to Gozo, and those who are evidently worried about the negative environmental impact that the tunnel will have.

I asked three key players participating in this debate – the Malta-Gozo Tunnel Steering Committee, Din l-Art Ħelwa, and the Gozo Business Chamber – about their views on this project and whether concerns are justified.

Earlier this year, Franco Mercieca, chairman of the Malta-Gozo Tunnel Steering Committee, said that “the environmental impact assessment is at an advanced stage and we should have the final conceptual design in the coming weeks. This would lead us to a situation that we can test the market for prospective bidders to design, build, maintain and operate such a project”.

He further updated his statement, saying: “The conceptual design, which is a design of the Malta Gozo tunnel that is being proposed by the Maltese Government, has been in hand for a few months now. The conceptual design is important so that a cost-estimate, and therefore the feasibility of the project, is verified. This will be published with the pre-set award criteria in the coming weeks in the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire. Once the bidder is selected, the latter must come up with the definitive design which must be within our pre-set parameters.” Dr Mercieca sustains that the tunnel “is the best chance ever that we have to connect the islands. However, if the EIA proves to be exceedingly detrimental then we have to go back to the drawing board and rethink the whole permanent link project”.

Regarding the views from the Gozo Tourism Association about having a permanent link between Malta and Gozo, Dr Mercieca noted that, “the GTA has expressed concern that tourism to Gozo may suffer with the fixed link and that they would prefer a metro rather than an open road”.

“Firstly, I don’t know of any place in the world where improving accessibility has led to a decrease in visitors. I agree that the type of tourist will change but most definitely such a project will lead to an increase in the quality and quantity of tourists visiting our island. Just consider the number of hotels, not in Mellieħa, but in Ċirkewwa/Marfa region which have a bed capacity larger than the total number in Gozo and do not experience the seasonality we do in Gozo. The difference being the 5km stretch of sea with the consequential unpredictability of the crossing.”

Franco Mercieca

Regarding the metro issue, “this has also been discussed on a national basis. In principle, even the cockroaches on the islands would agree wholeheartedly with such a project. However, this is a totally different project which, according to ARUP, is only feasible for the centre of Malta due to the quantum of potential users which are lacking in the periphery of Malta and the whole of Gozo. The population requirement for a metro to be feasible in Gozo is being quoted to be 100-150,000 which is a far cry from current numbers. From our estimates, a meagre 15- 20,000 people are living permanently in Gozo.

“The possibility of including a metro with the current road tunnel has been considered but abandoned due to lack of feasibility. Our consultants tell us that geologically we cannot have a tunnel wider than 14 metres which would not be sufficiently wide to have both a road and a metro. And this apart from the regulatory differences in inclination between a metro and a road tunnel that, according to our experts, are incompatible.”

Dr Mercieca clearly believes in the success and advantages that a tunnel adjoining the two islands will achieve. “The advantages of having such a project are plenty which one can classify into local and national issues. Gozo and Gozitans want this tunnel as the well-being drain which is highlighted in the social impact assessment published in 2017 is leading to an economic drain which pushes the young generation to leave Gozo for good. This results in the consequential brain and skill drain that are leading to a demographic drain. Over the last two decades the number of school children in Gozo has dropped by 40% compared to the Malta scenario where it dropped by 23%.”

“Our youngsters cannot combine career progression with rearing a family in Gozo. In fact, they end up having to choose between them; most choose career and thus they translocate to Malta. This is even more challenging for career-oriented women. Gozo is the region that produces most graduates but the least that absorbs graduates.” “Social tunneling will lead to better opportunities in education and employment, apart from better health services. However, the most important issue for the tunnel is that connecting the islands would boost the Maltese economy in general. The Gozitan economy is highly dependent on government investment. Over 40% of employment in Gozo is government-based which is very high compared to the 25% in Malta. With a population of 8% of total Maltese population, Gozo contributes only 5% of the gross domestic product. Thus, Gozo is an economic burden on the Maltese coffers apart from underproducing.

“The Faroe Islands embarked on an ambitious project of connecting the islands. Currently they are connecting three islands with a total subsea tunnel of just over 18 km at a cost of €286 million. With a population of 50,000 they have one metre of tunnel per person. The main reason for connecting the islands is that it’s the only way to boost their economy.”

Dr Mercieca says that he fully understands those who hold various concerns that such a project may present and believes that mitigation measures should be implemented as soon as possible.

“Overdevelopment of Gozo is the main concern; however, I find it totally unfair to link the issue of guaranteed accessibility to that of overdevelopment. It is like saying that if you improve the road leading to Ħal Safi, one would ruin the village. It’s the lax and inappropriate development policies that can ruin a place and not the improved accessibility.

“Overdevelopment must be dealt with through strict development policies tailormade for Gozo, by not only having ODZ areas but also having buffer zones established. The main feature of Gozo that distinguishes it from Malta is that the villages in Gozo are separated by a band of land and therefore these areas must be protected. This concept has to be initiated straight away even if the tunnel project does not come to fruition.”

As regards to the pollution, Dr Mercieca said: “Considering that by the time this tunnel project would be completed, we would have a higher percentage of cars less dependent on fossil fuels and that the ferries themselves are pollution factories, the logical answer is a no-brainer.

“Traffic is already an issue in Gozo, which is gradually getting worse. The fact that to go from the south to the north of the island one must go through Victoria is nonsensical. In my opinion the roads surrounding Victoria must be improved, apart from the consideration of the creation of an alternative route around or under Victoria. The centre of Victoria should be restricted for traffic and more areas should be pedestrianised. Also, decent parking facilities must be created.

“Without this project Gozo will continue to lose one of its best characteristics – the Gozitan himself. Gozitans do not need positive discrimination or subsidies, but equal opportunities and level playing fields; we are not second-class citizens.”

Alex Torpiano, executive president of Din l-Art Ħelwa, explained the concerns that the NGO has about the project especially in terms of the environmental impact.

Alex Torpiano

“Din l-Art Ħelwa has publicly acknowledged the connectivity problem of Gozitans, but is seriously concerned that (i) the proposed solution will have a major environmental impact, without necessarily achieving the stated objective of improved connectivity; (ii) the government has not yet carried out the studies that are required to assess the first point, and yet it has already declared that the tunnel will be built.”

He continued: “What is the use of paying lip service to ‘due process’, of having 'independent' authorities, or indeed of undertaking any studies, if the decision has already been taken by the Prime Minister, and Parliament, that the tunnel will happen?

Our concern is that this position simply represents electoral promises, which did not imply that a tunnel would be built even if studies showed otherwise. We are concerned that without a proper holistic assessment of the impact of such a major infrastructural intervention, Malta and Gozo may be burdened with major negative consequences, long after the current politicians have all moved on.”

Although an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is being done, Prof. Torpiano explained that Din l-Art Ħelwa believes that this is not the only study that ought to be done as there are other factors that affect, and will be affected, by the project.

DIN L-ART HELWA, LIKE OTHER NGOs, IS CONCERNED THAT WE ARE MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF A MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURAL PROJECT, WITHOUT KNOWING EXACTLY WHERE IT WOULD TAKE US

“An EIA should give data which informs the decision on what the environmental cost of the project would be. We believe that there are many other studies that need to be undertaken. For example, one financial feasibility of the project that has been published is based on assumptions that are not necessarily factual. The length of tunnel, and hence the relative cost, have been assumed; but the indications are that the tunnel will be longer than that. The basis for the calculation of the costs, of construction as well as of operation, is still not clear.

“The implications of private investment to fund the project, investment which necessarily requires a return for the investors, is still not clear. The socio-economic impact on Gozo is still not clear. The impact on the existing ferry service is not clear. The impact on the road systems in Malta and in Gozo, as a result of this tunnel, is not really known - although congestion on the route from Ċirkewwa to Valletta is well known and can be expected to get worse with a higher volume of private vehicular traffic. Din l-Art Ħelwa, like other NGOs, is concerned that we are moving in the direction of a major infrastructural project, without knowing exactly where it would take us.”

“Having a permanent link between Malta and Gozo will have positive consequences for commuters, but as Din l-Art Ħelwa pointed out, why is it assumed that economic development is the only measure of well-being? And why does economic development always have to be at the cost of the environment? Any improved connectivity should, first, be for the benefit of everyone and not of a few. We are aware, for example, that one major lobby in favour of the tunnel are the commercial actors in Gozo who wish to deliver their goods to Malta without spending hours waiting on the quay; this is a legitimate concern. But would not a dedicated ferry, which avoided the need for waiting, solve this problem? We would like these options to be studied with the same rigour as for the tunnel.”

Daniel Borg

The Gozo Business Chamber weighed in on the discussion, explaining that there is favourable opinion about the tunnel from the Gozitans. “Surveys show that the majority are in favour of the tunnel. The Chamber believes there should be objective discussion accompanied by information on the subject. The recent publication of the studies conducted so far on the website of Transport Malta is a step in the right direction. The Gozo Business Chamber was the main instigator behind the permanent link between Malta and Gozo and believes that this project will ultimately benefit the Gozitan community, and the whole nation.”

The Chamber too expressed its support for the EIA report and the results gleaned from it and explained the benefits that it believes the project will provide.

“Like other large-scale initiatives and projects, an EIA is of paramount importance. That is why the Gozo Business Chamber has contributed by giving its opinion when the Project Description Statement & EIA Screening were issued for consultation. In proposing a subsea tunnel, the Chamber did this with a view that the seabed should be left intact and that such a project should in no way disturb the tranquility and isolation of Comino. Moreover, the Chamber has always insisted that such a project should be accompanied by clear guidelines on development in Gozo which would ensure that its countryside and village cores would remain intact.

“Obviously, like any other decision there are disadvantages. However with the right policies and a long-term vision and strategy in place, these can be mitigated and overcome,” the Chamber concluded.

According to the website of the Environment and Resources Authority, the status of this project is ‘Awaiting EIA and AA (Appropriate Assessment)’; however, (at the time of writing) there was no further information available on the website regarding the status of the report, the consultation dates of the EIA report, and the date and location of the public hearing.

Words by

Giselle is a freelance writer, proofreader and social media marketer who lives on Instagram and cappuccino. She runs Content for Success.