White Rocks? √ Just do it!

There are many critics of the White Rocks project: I say just do it!

Frank Portelli 24 June 2010, 12:00am

2 min read

√ Just Do It. I cannot mention the name in case it’s considered blatant advertising. I am allowed though, to recall that the Greek goddess of victory was called Nike and that she was usually depicted as having wings. A brilliant marketing brainwave introduced the positive check mark √ to the sporting world.

√ is immediately recognized as a “very good sign” internationally – and associating it with the shape of the wing of the goddess Nike was the logical step that completed the visual message. The √ Just Do It logo simplified the company’s identity to such an extent that the name of the goddess is now well nigh superfluous, and it is often not even reproduced in the adverts. The words ‘Just Do It’ emphasize the positive “can do” message. The rest is history.

The White Rocks complex’s name is now being associated with sports too. There is a proposal to convert this dilapidated area into a sports and leisure village in partnership with the private sector. It’s a massive area to be sure. As everyone who lives in Malta knows by now, the area in question measures 221,000 square metres of land. It’s still in the negotiating stage – but nonetheless some are already trying to shoot down the project. It’s in the genes.

As I understand it, the deal is that the government leases – not sells – the land, for a definite period of time (cens). In return the private company will be obliged to build the whole complex and to maintain it at its own expense – the estimated initial cost will not be less than €200 million. Add to this the running costs which have to be borne by the private company. The land will still belong to us because it is not being sold – except for the area where the 300 apartments are going to be built.

This area appears to be less than 10% of the total foot-print. Entrance to the sport and leisure complex will be free to the public to enjoy walking, cycling, as well as the adventure park. Sporting organisations will benefit from free facilities to train and enjoy their sport at agreed times. The plans include multipurpose stadiums for football, rugby, a tennis complex and a BMX track, and indoor facilities for different sports basketball, volleyball, fencing, table tennis, billiards, martial arts. A sports science centre to help enhance performance will be operational.

Of course there are those who are against it: you tell me who, I will tell you why To the government I say: √ Just Do It!

More from Frank Portelli

•

How about the EU Commission investigating this issue because the private investor is being given a subsidy worth hundreds of millions which shall cause unfair competition with other competitors?

•

Frank Let us say that the original maltese bidder lost a legal right to be considered. What promted the authorities to go directly to an operator and not issue a public/international call? Financial regulations stipulate that for a direct purchase of a few hundred Euro, Govt officials need to get 3 quotations. Is it because the area is worth millions?

•

It requires 1150 apartments to be able to accomodate 100,000 tourists. How does this fit within the proposed project? So is Government, after all, giving the land for free to its selected investor? Why did Government not deal with the original Maltese investors as he seems to have done with the hand-picked foreign ones? The latest twist did in fact come this morning with the following contribution: http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100724/opinion/the-white-rocks-saga-unfolds Giving the land for free will give new operators a head start over surrounding accomodation owed by investors who did not get their sites for free but had to invested money to secure sites. How would one want to deal with this? reimburse present operators to restore a level playing field? Did the Prime Minister deal with these issues when he briefed the Party Grass roots on the project? Why fail to keep Parliament briefed when it is Parliaent that will have to decide? Why allow the un-iformed pro-project head-of-steam when so much info remains unknown, or known to selected persons or groups?

Angelo Cassar •

White Rocks Here is a comment made in a different forum 18 months ago -- by Jimmy Magro Quote “Rather it is the mismanagement, lack of foresight and weak governance that has left this property to fall to shambles. When this could easily been converted into a Club-Med resort. Give it free to the operators and let Malta benefit from the operations and not from the capital gain. This has been a mistake by all governments in Malta. Economic gain must come from the operational side: more foreign currency, more flights, more use of MIA, more purchases, more employment, more expenditure, more savings from employees, the investment itself Do not think up to your nose - but think long-term and calculate the economic benefit of having 100,000 tourists more every year.” WOW !! How come there is no innovation in creating wealth in Malta?” unquote http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090109/local/earthquake-rattles-white-rocks-complex Frank Portelli

•

I agree that the politics of envy married to the envy of business is a lethal marriage, but in suggesting that these combinations influence discussion may frighten away those who query in the interest of society. Hostility towards society can be gauged by the discrepancy between self-interest and the welfare of society. By way of an example, my actions will be anti-society if they are motivated by self interest or envy etc. On the other hand, negligence (criminal?) resulting in botched up deals and the ensuing social cost (we seem to have a potential few on our hands to put it mildly) will not be explained away by a perceived need to act. What worries me is that only the credit side of the transaction is being highlighted while the debit side seems to be ignored. In summary and conclusion therefore, may I say what I see as being both the debit and credit: 1. Our national cost: Government is to sell (possibly donate?) to investors a prime and sizeable piece of land over which 300 apartments, a 200 roomed hotel and commercial spaces will be constructed and owned by investors to operate and/or sell as owners. 2. In return, investors are to develop a sports complex (owned by Government, run by the investors themselves who will rent out to Malta associations?). Investors commit themselves to make up any shortfall in running expenses. Macro economic benefits will also accrue from the overall investment While there still seems to be much negotiation to be done, the bottom line is simple. The above has to be valued and subtracted to obtain net cost or benefit to society. No envy, no anti business or anti project sentiments nothing. Just a simple clear exercise to determine value in the interest of society. Will we have it?

Alfred Galea •

Frankie, you say swoosh I say swish, you say tomahto I say tomayto......I like your "5 points", they're a lot better than saying Just do it, coz just do it to me means, go ahead and do whatever you want, you've got a majority in the House and if anybody, any auditor finds that things weren't done transparently enough and that entities involved were corrupt or blacklisted we'll just take one word of the report, get our media people to harp on it and belittle those who oppose. Which is the way things are done in Malta.

Angelo Cassar •

Hi Danny The previous bidders gave up their bid. They submitted a bid – and gave it up. What is Government to do – remain tied to a bidder who has given up on his bid. It has done so for a number of years The Country must move forward It’s becoming more and more obvious that much of this antagonism to the present project is being orchestrated by previous bidders The antagonism is then being stoked further by non-well wishers. It’s the politics of envy married to the envy of business – a lethal marriage. The basis of the present proposal as it now stands is nearly 200 Tumoli ( not Times ) – better than the previous bids. Because :- “From the date of their completion, the sports facilities will be the property of the people and the government of Malta”. There is no transfer of ownership There is no comparison to the previous bids I believe we have to √ Just Do It !! or Just Lose it Best regards always Frank Portelli

Angelo Cassar •

North Actually it’s SWOOSH not swish √ Just Do It!! False declarations in parliament are not merely false declarations of assets and income –false declarations include failure to declare a specific interest . Some individuals who are raising objections to this project have a conflict of interest – which so far has been undeclared. More on this in a separate blog Information and Perception I will grant you that Government should have explained better the situation. No doubt about that. Aims and wishes There are also some whose ultimate wish is to see economic difficulties proliferate in this country. My wish – and yours too I am sure – is to see this country move forward – for all of us to benefit. So I say to the Government. 1. Negotiate Hard – within a specific Time Frame 2. Bring the deal to be scrutinized in Parliament 3. Let Parliament decide – Deal or no Deal 4. Let both parties have a free vote 5. Anyone with an interest should declare it best regards from all directions including east Dr Frank Portelli

•

Hello Dr Portelli, Other bidders: No there were no other bidders to the current process. What MT is reporting is to me very serious if my understanding is correct. I get the impression that there were Maltese businesspersons who had, in the past, actually secured the right to develop the white rocks but their plans to include residential/comercial properties had been refused! Now these new plans include development of such properties! 2. Parliament scrutiny can be an ok process BUT, what chance is there for sober parliamentary deliberations as say was the case with the financial regulatins bill etc, if leading to this scrutiny we shall be treated to the now well known WE treatment in portraying an emotional picture through possible selective highlighting, in the interests of developers, making those who have an issue with the project look party poopers. Sopra corna bastonate Government is alreadt taking the markeeting line itself rather than creating a climate for sober analysis as above! Power Station etc revisited. We do not need markeeting hogwash to Government singlemindedness but clean and clear information.

Alfred Galea •

Again you're talking about a PL MP and false declarations and corruption and the Labour Party, which doesn't interest me one bit. Then you go and say...... "...I have said Government should negotiate hard with this new Consortium, within a definite time frame, and then present the draft agreement to parliament for a final decision The final decision will be with the highest institution of the land. I am sure it cannot be better scrutinized than by individuals who have parliamentary privilege and can say anything without fear that they will be sued......." To me THAT is not "Swish, just do it". The government should be as transparent as it said it was going to be prior to election, tell parliament EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW, including the full contract and THEN the house should make the decision without any pressure from the leaders.

Angelo Cassar •

Hi Joe I have re read your initial comments of this blog and I still understand them that you seemed to imply that I might have had some conflict of interest with Mater Dei and now with sports medicine and the sports complex. If I misunderstood you then please accept my unreserved apologies. I have no conflict of interest with either Mater Dei nor with the Sports Complex -- that is why I invited you to state publicly anything that you know which is contrary. I mentioned the case of an ex labour Minister to illustrate my total belief that there should be ZERO tolerance of Corruption – especially where politicians are involved there should be no time bar at law. I had already stated in Public that one ex Labour Member of Parliament – being also an ex Parliamentary Secretary had made false declarations regarding his assets as they were declared to parliament. This is after all what the Labour party itself has stated – that there should be zero tolerance for corruption, and that there should be no time bar at law – yet we saw no action on this. So you may ask why did I say √ Just Do It!

Because I have seen too many projects in this country being torpedoed --even before they are launched, So we can either accept this negative attitude that is being dispensed or we should start doing things. It’s depressing the Country to hear just negativism. I have said Government should negotiate hard with this new Consortium, within a definite time frame, and then present the draft agreement to parliament for a final decision The final decision will be with the highest institution of the land. I am sure it cannot be better scrutinized than by individuals who have parliamentary privilege and can say anything without fear that they will be sued. Everyone – even parliamentarians – have an obligation to tell us the real reasons why they are against this project. Best regards Frank Portelli

Angelo Cassar •

Malta Today Leading Article The leading article in Malta Today by Matthew Vella confirms what we have said in this blog that there have been other tenderers for the White Rocks area. Since 1995 there have been several proposals but none were accepted. So it is not correct to say that this present project has been “hand-picked.” The present proposal still needs to be negotiated and then has to be approved by parliament. It’s far from done yet. You want my honest opinion? We risk going the way we went with the RCSI project – in which I could have had a personal interest. The RCSI were prepared to invest 50 million Euros of their own money, establish a medical school, a nursing school, and postgraduate centre – the project was consistently torpedoed - by professionals who had a vested financial interest to do so. That’s why I say √ Just Do It!

Government should negotiate hard with this new Consortium , within a time frame. and then present draft agreement to parliament for a final decision. regards Frank Portelli

•

The leading article in today’s MT is very revealing. So the promoters of this particular project have been handpicked by 'Government' and 'their' project would not go through a competitive process where other specialists would compete to deliver the best for Malta. Instead, the project of the hand-picked promoters would only go to Parliament apparently in the wake of a WE (no less) marketing campaign armed with a healthy budget in the interests of investors when sports organizations may have already been strategically placed to act as ‘human shields’. Government has the responsibility to ensure that all facts are presented cleanly and calmly in the interests of a sensible and coherent discussion and so if my understanding of facts is correct than all I can say is that this is not the way to go Mr. Government. An apparent strategy of state-of-the-art Machiavellian proportions makes Government behaviour look shifty. In my opinion, we may need to depend on individuals of good will to stand up for what is right because once again, Government is coming across, in my eyes at least, as a protagonist in money-making intrigue rather than a catalyst of sound healthy initiatives in the national interest as the promoter of good governance. Conflict of interest can only be mitigated by reliable clean facts not emotional hogwash.

Alfred Galea •

Expressing an opinion and urging the government to "just do it" to me are two different things. Why would you take my comment as "throwing mud" and why mention an ex PL MP?? A tract of land, some say is worth 200 million is being "leased" to foreigners to build a sports complex, nobody knows anything about how, who and what is involved in this deal coz the PM with the excuse of "negotiations are still going on" isn't saying anything....the same PM who did not even read the Power Station contract, and we all know what a big joke that turned out to be, involving blacklisted entities, and others who were convicted of corruption, etc. etc. And yet you urge the govt. to Just Do It......it doesn't sound right to me. Regards from here too, Joe.

Angelo Cassar •

Dear Mr South I am sorry I do not know your real name - Contrary to your implications I am not involved in “sports medicine” although even if I were involved in sports medicine I would still have a right to express an opinion on the White Rocks Complex. My criticism has always been based on facts – whether it was on Mater Dei, Tax Evasion, Corruption ---and it is always intended to be constructive. The statements I made to the police were 100% correct and there is an ongoing investigation. I believe that there should be ZERO tolerance of Corruption – especially where politicians are involved there should be no time bar at law I stated in Public that one ex Labour Member of Parliament – being also an ex Parliamentary Secretary had made false declarations regarding his assets as they were declared to parliament. Nothing happened - no action was taken - not even by the labour party. If you do know any wrongdoing on my part you are free to publish it for everyone to read. But please do not try to throw mud – it does not befit you Regards Frank Portelli

Alfred Galea •

Swish.......and this from a guy who criticised the government when it came to Mater Dei and certain contracts. Of course there could be a perception of a conflict of interest when it comes to a hospital, might be there is the same in the building of a "sports complex", you know like "sports medicine" and so on......

Angelo Cassar •

Ω --- One Last Thing Hi Danny Several proposals were made in the past to develop this area from elitists’ ideas such as “Celebrity Hotels” for the few to environmentally unsustainable projects such as “Golf Courses”. None were considered suitable. I personally have no doubt that most of the antagonism to this project is being fueled by some of the companies / individuals who failed to win approval Their appetite is voracious and insatiable. They have the power to orchestrate a campaign in the media – and have considerable influence in political camps They sow doubt – and their conflict of interest is undeclared. Can a Government enter into discussions with a Company on a project. Good Governance is based on the principle of Bonus Pater Familias – a principle which originated in Ancient Rome – it is based on the principle that the head of a family will exercise the care and diligence necessary for the well being of all the family. Government can invite applications and can initiate a process of discussion itself . Once it has concluded the negotiations it is committed to submit them to Parliament for scrutiny and approval or rejection. It will take time maybe another 3 years - that’s why I proposed √ Just Do It!

As to the last thing Ω --- last Letter --- – Omega Literally “ Great O” Best regards Frank Portelli

•

The big question still needs an answer Could Government enter into such negotiations without having called for other parties to register their interest?

•

I suppose that we will then have to wait and see. If the many sports associations will be happy with the deal, then that will be a step in the right direction. If investor return on the core deal of appartments/hotel/leisure is so substanntial that they can afford to make the associations happy at the expense of taxpayer, (Versailles Palace only occupies a small percentage of total land area yet what is Versailles without its landscaped gardens - as you say, if the apartments will be sold by investors than Government will sell the land through perpetual emphyteusis) then it will be an uncomfortable situation for all (would anyone dare use the associations as human shields?). If on the other hand all-round benefits are evident then I am sure that we shall give the benefit of the doubt to Goverment. This reminds me of the midi project. The RMYC were promised new premises as were the local footie club. Eventually Governent itself provided RMYC with alternative location while I understand that the local footie club ghadhom jittewbu despite tons of PQs from either side of the political divide. Insomma hope should perhaps spring eternal.

Angelo Cassar •

Hi Danny I will try to answer your points based on my own understanding 1. Formal negotiations between White Rocks Holding Company and the Government have only just begun 2. Project will only go ahead if agreement is reached between the two sides and the agreement is approved by the Maltese Parliament. 3. Negotiations will centre on the design, costing, and terms for emphyteusis – not sale. 4. Term of the lease is still to be discussed – my reading is between 65 to 95 years. Clearly the longer the term of the lease -- the greater the value This is what Mr Gibbons representing the company had to say “There is one final and very important point, and a point that is not subject to negotiation. From the date of their completion, the sports facilities will be the property of the people and the Government of Malta”. As to the area where the apartments are to be built – I cannot see how one can sell an apartment if it is built on land which is on a temporary lease. Therefore this area I am sure will have to be freehold. This area appears to comprise around 6 % of the site. Since 1995 several companies have submitted their interest to develop the White Rocks area – but none of the proposals were accepted. The Public will be entitled to free entrance to the adventure park, to the walking paths and to cycling paths. Company Obligations 1. The Company will be obliged to build the complex to international standards --completely at its own expense 2. The Company will be obliged to maintain the sports complex to international standards at its own expense for the duration of the lease 3. Registered Maltese Sports Associations will be given time slots for their sport – free of charge Benefits to the Company 1. Income from the Hotel and from sale or rental of Apartments 2. Income from Sponsorship & Sport Tourism / International Tournaments At the end of the day our Sports Associations will all be given allotted times to use the facilities free of charge The rest of the time White Rocks Company can utilize the facilities for international tournaments, and obtain sponsorships to generate income. As I said the formal negotiations have just started and when these are concluded they will be presented to parliament Even before the negotiations have been concluded there are those who are doing their utmost to undermine this project If they succeed in discouraging these investors – we would all have lost It will also discourage other investors in the future. Hence my advice to Government √ Just Do It!
thank you for a good discussion keep those ideas coming regards Frank Portelli

•

Dear Dr Portelli, Doing anything is fraught with challenges and uphill struggles. It is easier to put spokes in wheels than build anything that works for the country. In achieving for malta all must do their part. Rather than comment, therefore, may I ask you a few basic questions in the hope that inforation will encourage us to back this project that promises so much to our Maltese sport: 1.WhiteRocks Holding Company is negotiating with Government for the granting of an emphyteusis (sorry to insist, sale not rent) of the White Rocks site for the development of 300 apartments, a 200 room hotel, commercial premises and sports facilities. My question: Could Government enter into such negotiations without having called for other parties to register their interest? 2. Will emphyteusis on land give by government to the SPV over which the 300 apartments, a 200 room hotel, and commercial premises will be built be by way for a temporary or on a perpetual emphyteusis? Will this land be given for free or against payment? Will the developers pay Ground Rent? 3. In generating its return from apartments (through sale?) hotel and leisure facilities, would you agree that the sports facilities will be an important selling point in the interest of the promoters? 4. All development mentioned so far will be to the investor’s benefit. Malta will benefit from operation (i.e. various contractors at development stage and employment of, hopefully, Maltese personnel by way of managers, waiters, attendants etc). Malta will also benefit from having sports facilities for the use of Maltese Athletes. (Government’s biggest selling cry) Yet the ongoing management and maintenance costs of the sports facilities will be offset by sponsorship and commercial sports-specific revenue. I therefore do not quite understand the importance of sports facilities being the property of the people and the government of Malta if we still shall have to pay the operators for the use? Or am I missing something here? Regards

Angelo Cassar •

Danny – I have to hand it to you. And I mean that – I agree there has been a lack of information on the project. I sometimes wonder whether the Government is being “conditioned” in its behaviour – both from internal as well as from external sources. Re Your Points A lease is not a sale A lease is a commercial agreement by which the owner of the land gives the lessee the right to use the land in return for an agreed “rental”. The lessee (in this case the Private Company) must adhere to the conditions of the lease or lose the right to use the property. There is no transfer of ownership. Here is what Casper Gibbons ( White Rocks Holding Company ) in his speech 9th June 2010 said:- “But there is one final and very important point, and a point that is not subject to negotiation. From the date of their completion, the sports facilities will be the property of the people and the government of Malta”. https://opm.gov.mt/casper_gibbons?l=2 This means that the Government ( read you and I please) will immediately benefit from at least 200 million investment in the building of this project – because it will belong to us. That’s the Rolls Royce The best part of the deal is that they ( Private Company )will be paying for the running costs – throughout the period off the lease. The area – where the residential accommodation will be built – must be freehold. Who is going to invest in a property if it is not going to be freehold or at least redeemable ? This area is less than 10% of the whole. Regards Frank Portelli Declaration of Interest Although I am not receiving any remuneration from either White Rocks nor the Government – I stand to benefit from enjoying the facilities offered at the White Rocks Sports Complex

Angelo Cassar •

Kirill I noticed a good letter from yourself in the Times of Malta as well as your positive attitude. I am certainly not advocating ignoring queries – in fact I am all in favour of raising queries so that they can be answered. I would rather keep this particular blog focused on the White Rocks Project – not diluting the discussion on Mater Dei or the Power Station ---we can open a separate blog on each of these subjects. I agree with you that there has not been enough communication from the Government side on the White Rocks Project – rather “hazy “ as you put it ! I am also on record stating that genuine people like yourself who are knowledgeable on the subject and whom I believe can make valid contributions should be taken on board. regards Frank Portelli

doris cassar •

As I have mentioned elsewhere, I am all in favour of a project that promotes sports participation. However, we just cannot ignore all the queries being raised, many of them valid and to which no answer seems to be forthcoming. We all remember the hype behind the 17year building of the Mater Dei Hospital where you yourself Dr Portelli, know things were done wrongly, and please note I am not implying corruption but rather incompetence in how a hospital of that size has turned out to be rather an overkill in structure and a massive underkill in all other elements. Same with the powerstation, of course we need an extension, but also that things hadto be done competently. Regarding the white rocks project, in which the goverment is already spending thousands on the media hype, just as they did for smart city befor the past elections, things appear , for want of another word, hazy. so yes Frank, just do it, but you do it fairly, transparently and for the good of the athlete in general. sport in malta cannot afford a 17 year wait due to incompetence as for mater dei nor the tarnishing of a reputation such as the power station. With the way the whole process is being managed the goverenment is giving everybody the opportunity to criticise the whole project something that I personally do not wish to see, because as has happened so often in the recent past local sport will end up suffering.

•

Information. I know of nobody who is against the project. I know of many who are asking for detailed information, to enable them to form an opinion. Information is power. I do not thing it is very wise to militate for something in respect of which detail is at a premium. So you can help by pointing at the place where detail on project is available. I do not mean the selected bits and pieces that keep popping up like rabits from a magician's hat but a whole chain of details. Lease is sale of property for a specific period of time. If this is a 75 year lease, the lesees will OWN the property for 75 years. Lease also carries a ground rent. What annual ground rent will lessees pay Government in this case? You mention a sale (i presume outright) for a small footprint. Is this footprint by any chance that part where apartments hotel etc are to be built? etc etc etc Deadlines? Agree 100%. But civilisation means working within established cultures based on reasonable rules and regulations that work on checks and balances. A system without checks and balances can fall under a number of systems such as dictatorship or feudal. These and other systems certainly had the philosophy of just doing what the top guy decided no questions asked. And questions need answers. So I would appreciate if you could point to detailed info to enable formed opinion and healthy debate. warm regards

Angelo Cassar •

Hi Danny The discussions are on leasing the area not selling it –except for a small footprint . The lease will be temporary i.e. for a fixed period of time -- the period has not been defined yet. The land is not going to be ‘given to anyone’. It is going to be leased and in return the capital expenditure is to be borne by the Private Company. In addition to the capital expenditure the Company will be obliged to pay for all the maintenance throughout the term of the lease. I agree that the agreement should go to parliament - once the discussions are concluded. People like you (and me) do well to keep the discussion alive and to bring Ideas for consideration. I believe that time is of the essence not only for this project but for most projects. We need to get on In this Country we need to start doing things more efficiently I propose that Government must adopt a policy of having deadlines and miles stones for all projects whether it is the White Rocks project or any other project. Without milestones and deadlines projects become protracted and they take an unduly long time That is why I chose “JUST DO IT” for this blog and Czars for another Action regards Frank Portelli

•

1. A lease ot rent but a sale of a property for a specific period of time (75 years?) 2. That a piece of property has been left to fester by Goverment does not authorise Goverment to give it to anyone without observing the rules to do some project. I can name 20 such abandoned places. Are we going to hand out these properties without due diligenece and observace of basic governnance and management rules? 3. So Government, do it properly...next step, give parliaent the businessplan for parliaentary and popular scrutiny (why has such a basic need become soe kind of big issue?) Government's strength will be show when due process has been respected while lobbies may not agree with aspects. In this case yes Goverment should finally decide and move on. Dispensing information in bits and pieces is not a way to go especially when these have not been porcessed through checks and balances proceedures...

Angelo Cassar •

Hi Danny Of course turning obstacles (threats) into an advantage is a time honoured tactic. This is a case in point In January last year (2009) the area had become so dilapidated that it provided the ideal set for a training exercise for the Civil Protection Department The state of the area was considered commensurate with the devastation that would have occurred had an earthquake measuring 5.1 on the Richter scale hit it. It cannot remain like that. It needs to be developed and enjoyed by all of us. At the moment there are squatters and drug abusers abusing the area. So I say to the Government get on with it remember “in the long run we are all dead” √ Just Do It !! regards Frank Portelli

Angelo Cassar •

Thorny Correct it’s my land -- and it is your land too – in fact it is our land. And more importantly it’s going to remain our land -- contrary to what is being bandied about -- it's not going to be sold. It is going to be given out on a lease --and it is going to be a temporary lease except for small footprint (Less than 10%). In addition the Private Company will have a contractual obligation to pay for all the maintenance of the complex throughout the length of the lease. As regards open and transparent discussion in parliament by all means. Hence my advice to the Government Just do it Frank Portelli D

•

Niccolo Machiavelli had a point when he observed that entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage. We must therefore heed the words of Schumpeter that Bureaucracy is not an obstacle to democracy but an inevitable complement to it. After too many years in office, a Government may easily become contemptuous of Governance principles. In its frustrations to compensate for lack of energy to apply Governance principles. Government conceit may seek short cuts. This is a cost to pay for no alternanza. The landscape of territories governed by forces that abandoned good governance is littered by expensive half backed projects and lost millions/billions. For as Ellen Terry warns, conceit is an insuperable obstacle to all progress. So by all means do, but do responsibly, transparently, being fully accountable for all actions and decisions. Mater Dei, Power Station … are we having problems with the application of these basic tenets? I think that we are.

Luke Camilleri •

Does one just do it? Do it a project which Dr. Gonzi is already dragging his feet to discuss in Parliament with the People's Representatives, and has already engaged his usual undisputed PR Consultants with millions of € contracts to polish it up and give it luster and make it appetizing to the gullible public out there? Is it asking too much if it is done with public scrutiny, general consensus, OPEN and TRANSPARENT discussion, accountability, and without arrogance and refraining from mentioning that there is land speculation involved and public land at that, is just plain dictatorial greed, and arrogance