Marsaskala residents angered by link between ferry project and promenade works

In less than half a year, activists involved with the Marsaskala Residents’ Network (MRN) went from being concerned about the prospect of Marsaskala Bay turning into a ferry harbour to dealing with a fully fledged €18 million regeneration project covering a 1.5km stretch.

While the group’s collective memory still bears scars from a hard-fought battle against the marina project, which was eventually scrapped shortly before the 2022 general elections, it is now up in arms against works initiated without any approved permits from the Planning Authority (PA).

To date, Infrastructure Malta (IM) has applied for two planning permits: one that seeks permission to change the use of a part of the promenade to the proposed landing and waiting area for the ferry, and another seeking permission for dredging works to be carried out in the bay.

Despite the fact that these permits are still awaiting a recommendation from the PA’s case officer, work is already underway across the promenade, raising questions about how such a massive project is being delivered at a rapid pace without any comprehensive planning documents available for public scrutiny.

Infrastructure Minister Chris Bonett first floated the prospect of a ferry in Marsaskala in April. The minister referred to the ferry proposal in the context of the government’s commitment to increasing the variety of public transport routes available.

MRN, flanked by Moviment Graffitti, had responded to the minister’s comments with concern, noting that surveying works on site had already begun by June.

Eventually, matters came to a head when MRN was invited to a meeting with the minister in mid-September.

In comments to The Shift, MRN member Caroline Caruana recalled how the meeting felt like they were simply being informed about a decision that had already been taken, and how this was later framed as a consultation with local stakeholders.

Shortly after that meeting in September, Bonett announced an expanded version of the project, which would include the refurbishment of 1.5km of coastline, stretching from Marsaskala’s parish church to the site of the abandoned Jerma Hotel.

Bonett’s announcement, which was accompanied by a survey conducted by Labour Party statistician Vincent Marmara that found 59% of Marsaskala’s residents believe a ferry in their locality would be a good idea, did not include any detailed plans for what the regeneration project would look like.

“The minister told us that this is a regeneration project that’s going to cost €18 million, so the minimum one would expect is that such a price tag would also mean that people’s right to know what this project is actually going to look like is going to be respected,” Caruana said.

“After a lot of back and forth, we were finally informed that additional permits were issued through Transport Malta for ‘emergency works.’ So, are they telling us that all this work is going to be issued to different contractors without any planning permits?” she added.

While MRN did not contest the need for refurbishment in some parts of the promenade, residents concerned about the impact of the ferry proposal are outraged about the fact that it is being lumped together with necessary infrastructural maintenance.

What’s significant about the decision to split the project into multiple planning and emergency works applications is that it isn’t being scrutinised through the various impact assessments that would be required for a major project.

“…these permits cannot be accessed by the general public. So now, everything is sliced into smaller parts, we don’t know what these emergency permits are actually allowing, we will not be able to object to them… so the question basically asks itself: Why is this being done?” Caruana said.

Questions have been sent to the infrastructure ministry regarding the unexplained use of emergency works procedures and multiple planning applications, with an additional request for more information about which contractors were hired for these works and at what cost. Questions were also raised about why works were initiated before the public had a chance to review the ministry’s master plans for the site.

No answers were forthcoming by publication time.