|
Renowned travel writer Paul Theroux’s description of Malta makes painful reading. His ‘Pillars of Hercules,’ published in 1995 after travels throughout all the countries in the Mediterranean basin has him wondering why Edward Lear chose to live in this “most irritating Mediterranean place.” Theroux finds the “earth so parched that the plowed fields had the same look as the nearby stone quarries.” For Theroux, Malta is “a fearfully rocky place, and still so dry that the islands five desalination plants were going at full bore.” From Mdina he looks down over a “landscape of powder and dead trees” and longs to get away from a city which is “parched and lifeless like Valletta.” The writer and his fellow passengers trudge back to their ship disappointedly. Theroux concludes “The feeling was that Malta - magnificent from the ship, with a drink in your hand - was rather disappointing up close. Afterwards, no one had a good word for Malta, even after having given it a good five hours of thorough scrutiny.”
True, the above is just one man’s damning indictment of Malta (he is equally caustic about Cyprus), but it is still an outsider’s view of the country. It is the opinion of a disinterested person who is widely-travelled and experienced. And when the high point of that person’s Malta visit is his conversation with a coffin-maker and undertaker (Mr Agius – still operating near St. Paul’s Anglican Cathedral, in Valletta), the people who market Malta as a tourist destination have got to be worried. And when Malta is described as having the “culture of South London in a landscape like Lebanon,” the people in government should be tearing out their hair. For despite the fact that Theroux’s account was written a good ten years ago, his descriptions still hold good. The bottom line is that he found Malta ugly, unlovely and seriously boring.
The dry and scraggy landscape is a natural feature which we have to live with, but Malta could do with a serious make-over.
Any amateur beautician will tell you that cleansing is the first step in the beautification process, and following a letters barrage and the sending of mug shot equivalents of impromptu dumping sites to the newspapers, the government has twigged on to this too.
Unfortunately, it’s looking suspiciously like another case of PR prattle rather than finally seeing some action being taken. Taking to the airwaves on Radio 101 once again, the Prime Minister was reported as suggesting that the government and the Opposition could jointly conduct a Keep Malta Tidy campaign. Penalties for dumping are to go up steeply. So far, so good. But then the Prime Minister goes on in an attempt to take the funny biscuit award. “My appeal, however, is for a national political consensus to keep Malta clean. I am calling on Alfred Sant to join me in an exercise as government and Opposition, or at the level of the Nationalist and Labour parties to have a clean country.”
Now Alfred Sant has been called a lot of things by his non-fans, some might even be true, but Sant the Litterlout? Why is the Prime Minister calling on Alfred Sant, of all people, to keep Malta clean? Is there top secret footage of the Leader of the Opposition chucking apple cores out of the window? Has he been caught on some furtive trip to Maghtab, trying to dispose of a cracked WC? Of course not. The Prime Minister’s plea is a typical political ploy – that of putting off action by requesting consensus. It’s just that in this case consensus already exists. The fact that Malta needs to be cleaned-up is not in dispute.
The reporters at Super One might convey the crudest and most distorted news and images but I have yet to see them at an anti-clean up demonstration. Alfred Sant and Tony Zarb do a fine “Innizzlu n-nies fit-toroq” act but so far they haven’t come up with the addendum “U nhammgu kulmaw.” The Prime Minister’s appeal for a round-the-table-discussion with the Leader of the Opposition to make it clear that the MLP-PN axis does not tolerate littering, is an exercise in superfluity. Consensus is to be achieved where it does not exist, where opinions about important issues such as pensions or the civil service, are divided.
As far as littering goes, it’s action, not consensus that we need. Maybe the Prime Minister hasn’t realised that he is the one in charge and the buck ultimately stops with him, but it’s about time he should. Just as he can stamp his foot and demand two golf courses pronto, the Prime Minister can demand a national clean-up plan. In the same way that new laws and measures are introduced by stealth by means of weaselly legal notices, anti-littering and fouling laws can be brought into existence. Just as the wardens have become the bane of commuter’s lives with their vigilance and fining of perfectly explainable acts such as washing up dog excrement on the pavement, they can be made to fine litter louts. More than ever, this is a time, when everybody has had it up to the gills with endless pontificating and procrastination. Photo-opportunities are for Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Governments which want to be taken seriously take action and not call upon the Leader of the Opposition for a “Let’s clean up Malta” tea-party and the resultant smiling snaps probably to be sanctimoniously labelled by awed NET TV reporters as “Success kbir ghall-ambjent Malti”.
Besides the fact that these silly gatherings have a zilch-achievement rate, there’s a loss of perspective. Littering and illegal dumping are ugly, insanitary habits which must be eradicated and penalised, however there’s a bigger picture involved.
The horrendous urban sprawl, the complete disregard of planning laws and the flouting of all legal strictures by some contractors and developers is a much more worrying and irreversible process. Some of the most flagrant abusers are visibly staunch supporters of one political party. Others hedge their bets and contribute to both. If the Prime Minister really wants to do something worthwhile he should call upon the Leader of the Opposition for consensus on this matter – for both the PN and MLP to stop accepting donations from these cowboys, to denounce their illegal activities and to shut them out in the cold. The wads of chewing gum on the pavement which so perplex Minister Francis Zammit Dimech (if it were up to him he’d outlaw it) are annoying, the shoddy building habits and illegal structures are a thousand more times more so. People did not vote for Alfred Sant because they did not think he could deliver. Lawrence Gonzi should show that he is capable of doing so. Consensus? Yes, on other divisive issues. Otherwise, insofar as cleaning goes, cut the crap and as the Nike slogan goes ‘Just do it.’
|
