| Agriculture not Golf The Sunday Times 13 July 2002 Michael Briguglio (M.A. Sociology) The socio-economic study that forms part of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposed golf course at Tal-Virtu' is very revealing. With regards to impact on agriculture, it confirms what the Front Kontra l-Golf Course has been saying for a long time, namely that agriculture will be negatively affected by the proposed development. The study states that the total income generated by the fields at Tal-Virtu' is Lm31,000. As Joe Farrugia of the Progressive Farmers Union put it in the Sunday Times (7 July 2002), this figure is incomplete as it based on records taken from the pitkali markets and does not take account of farmers selling directly to hotels and catering establishments. It is well known that less than half the produce reaches the pitkali. Furthermore, fodder produced at Tal-Virtu' makes up 40 per cent of the total intake of various animals within the agricultural sector. The EIA shows that farmers are making it clear that "they would have difficulty supporting their families if they lost the income from their Verdala fields." Furthermore, "for the part-time farmers in particular, working the land is a family affair." Therefore, the development of the Golf Course will have a negative affect on a much larger number of people than quoted in the same study. The study confirms that that the fields comprising the proposed development site are, for most part, owned by the Government of Malta and administered by the Joint Office. The land is subject to the Ecclesiastical Entities (Properties) Act, 1992, i.e. the agreement reached between the Maltese Government and the Holy See, which says "The Government shall use the property transferred to it by virtue of the present Agreement to promote the safeguarding of the environment and the development of agriculture, and to meet the Country's most pressing social requirements, such as social housing and public utilities, as well as for humanitarian, educational and cultural purposes." It is more than clear that the proposed golf course violates that Agreement, as it relates to a private, not a public enterprise, that, to add insult to injury, will destroy the agricultural community at Tal-Virtu'. Furthermore, in no way can the proposed golf course be considered as meeting the country's most pressing social requirements. The EIA also shows that among the Tal-Virtu' farmers "there is an overwhelming sense of depth of association with particular fields - a very deep emotional connection with the land. Farmers have indicated that they simple couldn't survive (emotionally) without their land". This finding confirms that the development of the proposed golf course and country club has various other impacts besides the economic. Indeed, the study confirms that "the potential impact on the farmers of the construction and operation of the development proposal relates to the loss of fields, and the loss of opportunities to work the land and undertake recreational pursuits thereon. Heritage and family ties to the land would be severed and the income derived from the fields lost. The loss of opportunity to farm the land and to pass the tenure on to family / children would affect the farmer's lifestyle and perception of the future." The EIA states that "the loss of access to the farmer's traditional land and the removal of the opportunity to farm the land independently would severely impact a significant proportion of farmers and their families. It is considered that this impact would be of major significance." Besides, "through the implementation of the scheme, the aspirations of the majority of farmers would not be able to be realized." Hence, "the effect of the disruption to or loss of lifestyle brought about by the loss of fields is undoubtly of major significance to many farmers." Furthermore, it is asserted that "the entire area of agricultural land would be lost through the development of the scheme. However, upon completion, some 23% (16.5 ha) of the site would be in agricultural production (vineyards, fruit and olives)." Here one cannot but assert that it would be of great benefit if all agricultual land is retained, especially when one keeps in mind that Malta is losing agricultural land at the rate of 2 sq km every year. Besides, if social justice is a priority, then the agricultural land should remain being taken care of by the farming community of the area, rather than handed over to the developers. Indeed, the farmers in the area are ready to develop vineyard production themselves and thus reap the benefits of their investments. Here one should keep in mind that if land is taken from the farmers and given to the developers this will deny the farmers the right to avail themselves of the opportunity that is being given to farmers around Malta to grow vines. The disbenefits mentioned above, together with other disbenefits in other areas (archeological, infrastructural, etc..) strongly point towards a refusal of the proposed development. The Board of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority would therefore be doing a great service to Malta's agricultural sector, social justice and legal requirements if it refutes the proposed golf course at Tal-Virtu'. Malta's agricultural sector is facing exciting times due to various changes that will be brought about in the coming years, and the Government has publicly committed itself to help this sector restructure itself to meet the challenges it faces. The farming community at Tal-Virtu' is ready to look forward to progressive change. Let us give them the opportunity they deserve. |
 |
 |