Gozo tunnel: The battle for paternity

Partisan considerations on targeting the strategic Gozo district in 2018 and the positioning of rival candidates and MPs jockeying for votes risks skewing the debate on the Gozo tunnel

Franco Mercieca and Chris Said, who have teamed up in a “front” in favour of the Gozo tunnel, may belong to rival parties but they are both aspiring to become the respective front runners of their respective party and to take over from the old guard represented by Gozo Minister Anton Refalo and former Gozo Minister Giovanna Debono.

They seem to be banking on the inevitable popularity a tunnel proposal is bound to have on a small island where travel to the mainland depends on maritime transport.  The latest MaltaToday survey on the issue conducted in 2011 showed 65% in favour of a tunnel. 

It was Chris Said who first milked political capital out of this issue before the 2013 general election. In an orchestrated move the proposal for a Malta-Gozo tunnel was not made by the government but by Gozitan businessman Joe Borg, during a visit by former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi to the FXB Xewkija furniture factory in January 2011.

Then it was Chris Said’s turn to endorse the proposal, costing it at €150 million (half the current price tag) and organising a public dialogue meeting on the subject.  Following Giovanna Debono’s resignation from the PN parliamentary group after her husband was arraigned in court facing works for votes allegations, Said finds himself the natural front runner in the PN ranks, especially after being divested of the role of general secretary and asked by his party leader to dedicate all his energies on Gozo.  He cannot afford to lose paternity for the Gozo tunnel proposal to Joseph Muscat.  Therefore he now finds himself at the forefront of the movement to support a project on the watch of a Labour government.

Franco Mercieca is also widely seen as Muscat’s favourite for the role of Gozo Minister. In fact before 2013 he was regarded as one of the party’s star candidates.  But Mercieca failed to dent Anton Refalo’s strong hold on Labour’s Gozitan electorate. Now Mercieca seems to have Muscat’s blessing to take an active role in pushing for the tunnel project. This is bound to give Mercieca more visibility at the expense of Refalo.

Feeling left out, Refalo, who previously supported the idea of building a bridge, has come out in favour of a referendum in which he expects Gozitan votes to count more than Maltese votes. Mercieca has shot down Refalo’s idea. Gozo Business Chamber president Michael Grech has scoffed at the idea, noting that Refalo had never mentioned the word referendum, yet he wants one now, when a tunnel, not a bridge, is the primary option for government.

“Why do you want a referendum now?” The referendum seems to be a way for Refalo to remain on the centre stage of the debate. For after having seen the bridge proposal which he had supported ditched, and the proposed airstrip put on the backburner due to its take up of ODZ land, Refalo has found himself losing the paternity over any large project in Gozo.

Apart from the consideration of individual candidates jockeying for the Gozo Ministry, both parties have come to the realization that Gozo is one of the most electorally strategic districts.

In 2013 Labour won an unprecedented three seats in Gozo amidst major losses for the PN. In the 2015 local election the PL continued gaining ground in Gozo despite PN gains in the mainland. Both parties therefore seem keen on affirming their paternity of a project which may give them the edge in Gozo. Moreover both parties know that they can keep the dream alive for the two years without having to fork out any monies to realize it. What they may be discounting is that some Gozitans may see through the propaganda and start clamouring for more sustainable solutions like a fast ferry service to Valletta.

Surely for the PN the tunnel may create a rift between environmentally sensitive voters who tend to scorn large-scale developments, which are bound to impact negatively on the environment, and Gozitan voters who consider a tunnel favourably. It also creates a problem for the PN in selling its newly acquired green credentials.

Muscat may have less of a problem with his voters, who so far seem to support his pro-development agenda. By ditching the bridge he had initially favoured to the extent of commissioning a blacklisted Chinese company to conduct feasibility studies, Mucat has effectively neutered the Nationalist opposition, which now finds itself fighting for paternity of the project. Had Muscat persisted on the bridge, he would have allowed the PN to take a middle of the road position favouring a tunnel as an alternative to a highly visible bridge.   

Interestingly the new movement has also usurped the “front” appellative – which in the Maltese context is associated with  environmental movements opposing mega developments like the Verdala golf course and the Zonqor university. This may suggest a preventive strike against opponents who may be tempted to use the front appellative to oppose the project.

Ultimately what counts for the rival parties and candidates is who will take paternity of the tunnel. The risk is that with big business and both political parties supporting the project, the debate will be one-sided.

Moreover, if ever realized, the project may well be beneficial to the politically well connected construction industry due to spin offs like the construction of new roads leading to the tunnel in both Gozo and northern Malta.

Moreover so far the only report presented is a pre-feasibility study by Gordon Cordina, which concludes that a tunnel costed at a staggering €300 million is more feasible than a bridge. It is still unknown how much the state will have to subsidise the private owners of the tunnel for them to provide the service at an affordable price for the Gozitans who want to use it on a daily basis. Geological studies which would ultimately determine whether a tunnel could be constructed or not have still to be held.