Paul Borg Olivier speaks with David Felice for M.E. Design Magazine, relating his vision for a correct approach to Malta's capital city. The Mayor of Valletta points out some vital flaws in the city council’s support structure, and questions the logic of restoring the walls of a crumbling city.
What is your vision for Valletta?
If you want a vision you have to relate it to something. We are talking a lot about Malta in 2015. Well, that will be the 450th Anniversary of the Great Siege; that which gave birth to Valletta. It could mark a new beginning, just as the Siege did back then. La Vallette transformed Valletta from a small port to an advanced military machine, he founded a contemporary city with a developed harbour and a strong commercial base. He chose the motto Malta Rinascens – The rebirth of Malta as a whole and not just the foundation of the Citta’ Nuova. This would be the sort of visionary statement that can set the pace.
Targets like this, at a time when Malta will also be sharing the Presidency of the European Union in 2017 and Valletta will again be the Cultural Capital of Europe in 2018… These visions need to coincide. Governments can provide a generic vision, but the harbour of Valletta, this is different, this is the soul of the country. This could be a renaissance for the whole island.
But Valletta was the Culture Capital of Europe in 1998 and it was a bit of a non-event. Why should we believe it will be different this time round?
It will be very different this time round. There was very little advance notice then and hardly any commitment. True, Republic Street was paved, but that was an infrastructural project, very different to the way the paving of Merchants Street was planned. And there already are substantial changes, since then, to the cultural landscape of the city. There is revival. The concept of Valletta as an open air museum is not a cliché.
What is so different about the paving of Merchant Street?
The approach was one of a regeneration project. In fairness, maybe Republic Street did not need the same effort applied to Merchant Street. This street was dying a slow death. The project this time took into account the regeneration of movement within the city, the shops that had been disused for years and that are now being refurbished and will reopen.
You are very interested in movement and the facility with which one can move about the city…
Yes, I am, and it is why I am not that excited about giving priority to the restoration to the bastions, to the fortification network…
Why not?
Because the fortifications already leave a positive impact on the user of the city and the visitor. . I must admit that I am not that well informed about the project for the restoration of the fortifications, or about their physical condition, but they will consume a large volume of European Structural Funds… I would prefer it if these funds were invested in other projects, in its heart… Urgent projects, like paving ones throughout the city and St Elmo as one of our primary icons of our identity. It was the Valletta Local Council that listed St Elmo on the List of 100 Most Endangered Sites in the World. This, in itself, is not a shame, it is a call to appeal for sensitivity to this important site.
I’ve asked this before, who owns the city, who is really taking decisions about the city?
The city belongs to the state. I have no doubt about this. It belongs to me, to you, to the President, to the Prime Minister, to every reader, to the residents, to the business community, and to all. But local government needs to be strengthened…
How long have you been Mayor for?
Nine years… and 15 years on the council.
So who is the Mayor? What does he do? Is there a problem with structure here?
I own Valletta, but only as much as the Mayor of Rome owns Rome – many others are involved in directing the city. This is correct, all should own the city. But it offends me when someone suggests that Valletta should be run by a dedicated Ministry. I openly criticise the current structures. I believe that the city should be run by Local Government, which would include within it the rehabilitation agency. But there should then be a Valletta office in the Office of the Prime Minister – London is structured like that, with the Government Office for London [GOL] representing central government across the capital, delivering policies and programmes for 11 central government departments in a joined up way, and making London’s case in Whitehall, the heart of British Administration. The mayor should not assume responsibilities that are not his. But nor should Local Government be kept in a straitjacket… Sometimes I feel like a waterpolo player under water, unable to see the goalposts. But we should be given a structure within which to operate, not an annual budget to maintain a pavement every year.
Let us not get into the money side of things for now; so how do you see yourself right now?
I feel that I possess the city as a Bonus Pater Familias… that is feeling and working for the city as responsibly mine. I am the mayor of all. There are moments, of course, when I am seen to speak on behalf of the political party I represent – this is inevitable. But my approach is strictly above politics, even within the workings of my council. For example, we have rarely had to take a vote in the last 15 years.
The mayor is the representative of the city; he is its first citizen. This is very different from his executive role. The expectations of people are very high. The local authority is a point of reference. People will call me if there is a fire, or if there is a fight or if there are accessibility issues during an event, even if these are not necessarily the responsibility of the Council. There are great differences between the role of a mayor here when compared to, for example, the role of a mayor in Italy. I consider myself to have a community of 6,000 and an additional 400,000 users.
So what keeps you going?
It’s about passion. It’s also about pride. For example, I think we have played a major role in changing the perception of the city. I have to be objective here. Up to the middle of the 90s the perception was terrible. People now want to live in Valletta and entertain themselves here. I used to think that we had become very successful in reducing the rate of depopulation of the city. Now I think otherwise, or at least it is not happening as fast as I thought it would – it was a bit of an illusion. There is still a lot of speculation going on and buyers of residential properties are still mainly young professionals and foreigners. I hope this will change and extend to other sectors of society for a more homogenous social fabric. The numbers were there, but the reality is that it is still speculative. The property market in Valletta, which is naturally a peculiar one and dominated by the desire for residences with a good dose of history and sea views, has probably reached saturation point and I now realise how the city centre does not necessarily appeal to many. Price, of course, is determined by the market, but supply and demand are very, very small.
Commercially Valletta has come alive. There used to be fear, even in roaming the streets at night. Now we have over 1,000 covers in restaurants alone.
These arguments are not necessarily reflected in the city’s social fabric and education, though we have much better results in examinations by the children of the city than we have had for a long time. We also have a very successful programme at the moment, called the Valletta Community Network; we brought in the NGOs and the parishes and have managed to identify specific social problems, we have a community worker and we channel people to obtain assistance rather than try solving problems. For example we’ve identified several cases of usury among old people… There is a lot of solidarity here, but there are also many pitfalls.
Do you have the resources to support the expectations?
No, we definitely don’t. Unfortunately our funding is limited. Our allocation is still based on population and size. So, compare our situation to, for example, Qormi and Siggiewi, places which have a much higher population or cover a much larger, agricultural area. But the fact that, for example, 1,000 cars drive down Old Bakery Street per hour is not accounted for. And there is no direct access to alternative funds. Sometimes I ask myself whether we have succeeded enough in bringing the forces of authority together, though I’m not really sure that should have been my role. On the other hand, I know that many of the successful projects in Valletta, in recent years, were proposed by my Council. The residents’ parking is a case in point. Many used to oppose the Park and Ride Scheme when the Council was pushing for it since 1995… It was approved first in 2002, through very hard work.
I think Ninu Zammit has done a lot for Valletta. He and the Prime Minister have been the real sponsors of the city. Works done on the three public gardens of Valletta, the repaving of Merchants Street, and the removal of wires, which is probably the most underrated project in the city, all together cost more than three million Liri. It will cost an additional four and half million Liri to complete works on Valletta’s pavements and for the pedestrianisation programme. The city needs two hundred million Liri…
Say that again please…
Two hundred million Liri. But, don’t misunderstand me. What I mean to say is that people do not seem to realise the cost of projects like these and the full financial impact of the list of Valletta’s needs. There are millions being invested by the state in the city, but the impact is not felt as much as it would elsewhere, because the cost of these works is so high.
Government has launched its vision for a regeneration strategy for the Grand Harbour; Labour is doing the same. Regeneration has become an electoral issue, and this is probably a good thing. But, there is little reference to Valletta itself. What’s going on?
I would start with the position that Government took at the Johannesburg Summit. There was strong reference to the regeneration of Valletta, and a set of deliverables, some by this year and some by 2012. We are still far from reaching those targets. The Government’s plans for the Grand Harbour include the creation of a development agency to deliver the projects. This, in itself, is a good thing. But we also need to assess the structures which already exist and give such an agency a clear mandate. What will its effective role consist of, and, frankly, why is Local Government, not part of it? Again, here I have to refer to the need to give Local Government the tools to grow. It is still a young concept…
It’s 15 years old…
Yes, created at the same time that bodies like the MEPA and the MMA were, but these were given the resources and empowered to grow. The Local Councils still depend on their allocation from Central Government. There should be more trust in Local Government. We are an elected council not a nominated committee, there is a big difference. We should legislate for this.
What about the projects being proposed?
It is still early and they need much discussion. Some of the proposals appear ill-informed. For example, a cruise liner facility in Marsamxett? Where will people swim? Was no one aware that this is a favourite leisure area for the community? Cannot we vacate the bonded stores along the waterfront and encourage their replacement with small private projects? There are not many government owned properties in Valletta, but I am sure we can put them to better use. It is very important to agree on what we want to achieve from this process.
In any case, is the regeneration of Valletta dependent on the execution of such projects?
Certainly not. Assigning assets to a regeneration agency is one thing, but one should also seriously consider other direct measures such as real, tangible tax relief on restoration. We should be providing solutions to address abandoned properties and encourage their marketability. A typical example is the Derelict Properties Act in Ireland which assists owners through tax relief and burdens vacant properties. A similar example happens in Bruges, Belgium, this probably being the finest city with the best maintained streetscape and pristine facades. Tax relief for the restoration of one property could then be paid off from the income generated by the burden on vacant or abandoned ones.
We could also introduce participation in regeneration through existing tax regimes. In Rhodes, another World Heritage Site, a percentage of VAT collected from the business in the city goes to Local Authority to be used for regeneration and restoration projects. The city is not much larger than Valletta, but the local administration is much better equipped and resourced. This method of participation through taxation gives a direct return to the business community with an immediate and direct improvement in the urban fabric, and in the quality of life of the citizens, while also increasing the potential of tourism. Consider the stamp duty being generated from the sales in projects which exploit their vicinity to Valletta... One should consider a percentage of this being added to the budget for regeneration projects to balance the infrastructural and social content, putting the existing social fabric to be at the heart of regeneration. The MTA’s resources should be distributed more sensibly to the tourist zones. The fees generated from encroachment and for licensing catering establishments should also remain in the city or town, and distributed to Local Council to be used directly to improve the tourist product.
These are all great suggestions. But what does Valletta need to stimulate the enactment of a vision?
It needs a signature. You know, we have always lived on the signatures of Europe and great Europeans, from Laparelli to Caravaggio, from Carapecchia to Barry. The first thing that Sarkozy did when he took over the presidency in France was to call in architect Zaha Hadid to consider a project in Paris. Every President has left his mark, with the best architecture signatures going to Paris. From Renzo Piano to I M Pei, and others, have signed Paris. These are much more than the simple film star handprints in Hollywood. Imagine, appointing Zaha Hadid to design the project to replace the grain silos in Corradino…When my uncle, George Borg Olivier, replaced City Gate, he was making a very bold statement. We can criticise the replacement building as much as we want to, and I obviously agree, I do not like the Gate, but his was a strong political statement, a symbol of its time, for a newly sovereign independent Malta, contemporaneous and looking ahead.
