Unhappy about construction? Try complaining on Facebook, it works wonders...

It’s become something of a trend: when people have serious matters to complain about in this country – like rampant abuse in the construction and development sector, for instance – they immediately take to Facebook and vent all their outrage and fury there.

Then a little time passes; and back they come to complain some more, after all the things they previously complained about had somehow, miraculously, remained exactly as they were... despite all their Facebook rants.

And just to rub it in a little further, they’ll even remind you of all their previous posts on the same subject: ‘See? I warned you all about this last year!”

You know, sometimes I wonder if people like that really do believe that ‘Facebook’ is connected to some kind of giant, pan-galactic, instantaneous ‘problem-solving machine’... that, by simply hitting the enter button after a comment, they will have triggered an entire global network of chain-reaction responses:  all homing in, with heat-seeking precision, on the very nexus of the problem they highlighted in their post...

Erm, sorry to break the news but... it doesn’t. All your Facebook status update does is make your complaint visible to the few scores of likeminded individuals who are only able to see them because they’re your ‘friends’ anyway (besides, of course, tracking you and logging you instantly into complex algorithms which will eventually tell you what you want for breakfast. And you will comply. Oh yes...)

Meanwhile, it doesn’t matter how many ‘likes’ or ‘shares’ your posts get; or even how much discussion ensues in the comments below. The stark reality is that none of this will ever make one iota of difference to the real dynamics of whatever it is you’re complaining about. You may as well expect the last holiday pics you uploaded to have the same impact.

Take, for instance, the PA’s recent approval of the City Centre project in Pembroke. I don’t know about you – because that’s another thing about social media: we’re all in similar, but very different bubbles – but my Facebook feed is simply awash with complaints about that decision; just as it had been with every previous comparable project to get approved in its time. And these complaints go forth and multiply exponentially in all directions: attracting small bursts of commentary which (in my feed, anyway) always seem to feature the same old people making the same old arguments, year after year after year.

It doesn’t make them any less right, of course. But it doesn’t do very much to stop controversial PA approvals from being dished out either, does it?

Meanwhile, not to panic you all, or anything... but there is one way it might even make things worse. About the only aspect in which this scenario seems to have in any way ‘evolved’, is that the development projects themselves have just kept getting larger and more monstrous. I hate to say it, but to the untrained eye it really does start looking like there’s a causal link between the unpopularity of any given project, and its chances of actually getting approved.

That may admittedly sound absurd. Though it might look that way sometimes, developers do not come up with their bizarre ideas on the basis of how many people they are likely to piss off.  No, they are generally more concerned with maximising the potential profit of every square millimetre of their project’s footprint, by the most they can possibly get away with at any given time.

Well, that last detail happens to be the modifier in this equation. With each developer who successfully overturns public objections to get their dodgy PA approval, the scope of ‘what you can get away with’ increases.  And like Facebook posts, there is a knock-on, multiplier effect. If Development X managed to land himself a permit for so many stories on so many square metres, regardless of what the ‘Tall Buildings Policy’ does or does not say... well, it is understandable that Developer Y will only try and get more.  

Indeed, it is probably unavoidable, as apart from greed there is also a power-trip factor involved. For one thing, the ease with which developers overcome all hurdles automatically establishes them as the real power-brokers behind the scenes (more powerful, in some respects, than government itself: which will always be occupied by a party in the same lobby’s pockets anyway). And for another, there is a hierarchy of power to be climbed. The more you get away with today, the bigger you’ll grow, and the more clout you’ll have to get away with other stuff tomorrow. All the way to the top of the food-chain...

It is, in fact, an arms race, with no end in sight. And it is different from the traditional model in only one detail: that all the heavy weaponry is stacked firmly on one side of the argument, while the other side’s arsenal only seems to ever contain... Facebook, and nothing else.

This may in turn help explain the attitude you come across so often in all these online complaints. There is a pervasive sense of helplessness everywhere you look. Discussions only ever get steered in one of two directions: either towards giving up and leaving the country altogether; or towards engagement in some form of low-level, guerilla-warfare tactics... civil disobedience, drum-beating protests, ‘we shall overcome’, etc. (Even this direction feels kind of hopeless, though. We all know we shall certainly NOT overcome, at this present rate.)

But then again... since when are those the only two options? What ever happened to, let’s say, ‘exerting political pressure to bring out meaningful change’? It happens in other places, you know.  Heck, it’s happened here often enough. Divorce was one recent example. As I recall, the referendum by which it was introduced in 2011 was itself the direct product of only one person. An MP, yes... but still only one person. And besides: you all vote in elections, don’t you? (Unless you’re part of the 8-11%, of course: in which case none of this applies). So, you’re all already represented in Parliament; and as far as I can see there’s nothing stopping you from using that power to try and bring about some of the change you want.

Naturally, it would entail having to base your voting intentions on an actual political issue for a change (and telling your MP so, in no uncertain terms)... instead of merely on tribal instincts alone. So I imagine some people might find this path a little... tricky.

All the same, I see potential for a nationwide, cross-party public campaign, to pressure Parliament into adopting new planning policies and procedures... gently reminding MPs that they occupy their seat for a reason; and part of that reason is to actually represent their constituents’ views.

Of course, you could go about it somewhat less diplomatically, and simply write: ‘No Reform, No Vote’ on your ballot sheet. It worked wonders for the kaccaturi way back when; and if you likewise stick to your guns, there is no reason under the sun why it shouldn’t work here, too.

Meanwhile, a simpler course of action would be to seize the opportunity of the newly launched White Paper, to ensure the construction lobby’s interests aren’t the only thing to ever get debated in parliament. Just yesterday, Transport (and Planning) Minister unveiled plans to establish the Malta Construction and Building Authority (MCBA), in order to “consolidate existing entities and regulations”, and provide reforms intended to “bring a much-desired paradigm shift” in the industry. 

The public is invited to submit “comments, suggestions, or feedback”; and at a glance, I’d say there’s quite a lot to discuss. Part of the idea, for instance, is to roll “the Building Industry Consultative Council (BICC), the Building Regulation Office (BRO), the Building Regulation Board (BRB), and the Masons Board” (yes, it seems they have a ‘Masons Board’. Not that it needed spelling out, but anyway...) into one agency, so that “the streamlining of these services and operations would create one point of reference and ensure a holistic [system] for the industry.”

Well, I’m positively delighted that the new reform will make things so much easier for developers in general, but... hey, hang on a second here. Is that really what most urgently needs changing in Malta’s building and construction sector right now? Yet another reduction in bureaucracy, to ensure that as little as possible remains in the way of checks and balances?

But like I said, that’s just at a glance. There are a few mentions of ‘compliance’ and ‘enforcement’ here and there: some of the more major causes of complaint do seem to be addressed... though the white paper might not, in its present form, add up to a reliable reassurance that this reform will succeed where others have failed.

Still, that’s just one more reason to get this tsunami of online complaints channelled into a possibly more fruitful medium than Facebook. The way I see it, there’s a chance to actually influence a new, revised policy for construction and development in Malta... and by a serendipitous coincidence, there is also an entire multitude of people out there, filling the worldwide web with all their own brilliant ideas of how this can actually be achieved.

A match made in heaven, I would say. Now: if only they could just get together for long enough to channel all those common complaints into a single front; to pool their collective expertise, draw up a serious planning document of their own, and submit it for public consultation before the deadline expires... Who knows? Maybe... just maybe... they’d end up with a little less to actually complain about in future.

Damn, I thought there’d be a snag somewhere. I forgot for a second how much easier it is to just complain about stuff on Facebook. So that’s it, then. Forget I ever said a word...