Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1547312
18 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 25 OCTOBER 2026 NEWS JP Fabri The cost of Economist Bitmac's Gharghur ODZ dwelling proposal returns as eight-room guesthouse A proposal for an eight-room guesthouse on a rural site at the edge of Għargħur has been sub- mitted after an earlier applica- tion for a dwelling on the same property was withdrawn. The site, covering around 1,000 square metres, lies in the Outside Development Zone (ODZ) at the junction of Triq Santa Katerina and Triq tal-Bal- al, on the rural outskirts of the village. The property contains a number of old structures, in- cluding a vernacular building along Triq Santa Katerina. The new application (PA/06152/26), filed by Bitmac Ltd, seeks permission for the partial demolition of existing pre-1967 structures, with ver- nacular rooms to be integrated into the new development. It also proposes the dismantling and reconstruction of a rubble wall. The project involves excava- tion for a basement, reservoir and cesspit, together with the construction of a ground-floor guesthouse and swimming pool. It also proposes a change of use from residential use to a Class 3A guesthouse. The Malta Tourism Authori- ty has raised no objection, say- ing the proposal is covered by a Tourism Compliance Certif- icate issued in May this year for eight rooms accommodating 16 beds. The application follows the withdrawal of PA/07287/25, submitted by the same com- pany for the same site. That proposal had sought the dem- olition of the existing pre-1967 structures and the construction of a basement, reservoir and ground-floor dwelling with a pool. The previous application had attracted objections over both the proposed development in an ODZ area and the treatment of the existing rural structures. Din l-Art Ħelwa argued that the property was not a dwelling but had been used for keeping animals, and therefore did not qualify for a new dwelling un- der the Rural Policy and Design Guidance. It also pointed to the small size of the site's vernacu- lar structures and argued that the proposal breached several rural development policies. The Superintendence of Cul- tural Heritage separately ob- jected to the demolition of the vernacular structure along Triq Santa Katerina. It noted that the structure was already occupied in the 1968 Survey Sheet and appeared on the 1908 Ordnance Sur- vey Sheet. The building was described as vernacular, with double-thickness walls and tra- ditional ceilings made of kileb and xorok. The Superintendence for Cul- tural Heritage had called for the structure to be retained and restored, saying its demolition was objectionable from a cul- tural heritage perspective. The revised application now states that vernacular rooms will be integrated into the pro- posed guesthouse. Surprisingly, ERA which nor- mally objects to hotels in rural areas, had raised no particular environmental concerns over the previous proposal, although it noted a mature carob tree immediately outside the devel- opment boundary and required it to be protected during con- struction. It also said any interventions to protected trees within the site would require an environ- mental permit before works could begin. The latest application involves tree felling and alterations to rubble walls, but does not pro- pose a new vehicular access. Reporting by James Debono TOMORROW, the finance minister will present another budget, with the familiar antic- ipation of new measures, allow- ances and promises of relief. The conversation will quickly turn to who gained what and whether government has been sufficient- ly generous. Yet the more consequential question may concern what will not be announced. Which existing commitments have been reconsidered? Which programmes have outlived their purpose? Which difficult choices have released resourc- es for Malta's emerging needs? A budget is not simply a state- ment of how much a country intends to spend. It reveals what a country prioritises, and what it is willing to stop prior- itising. There is an important distinc- tion between affordability and choice. Growth can make an expanding public sector appear affordable, particularly when tax revenues rise alongside em- ployment and consumption. Malta benefited from precise- ly this dynamic in 2025. The general government deficit narrowed to around 2.1% of GDP, as revenue outpaced ex- penditure. But improved fiscal balances do not necessarily mean that public resources are being used more effectively. They can mean the economy is generating sufficient revenue to accommodate an expand- ing collection of commitments. The test comes when revenue growth slows, new pressures emerge, and government must decide what deserves priority. The latest figures make this test more demanding. During the first six months of 2026, government expenditure in- creased by 15.2% compared with the same period a year ear- lier, while revenue increased by 6.7%. The deficit widened from approximately €313 million to €698 million. Employee com- pensation increased by 10.2%, intermediate consumption by 22.1%, and gross capital for- mation by 23.4%. Half-year fig- ures reflect payment schedules and cannot forecast the entire year. These increases do not in themselves establish waste, but they raise an important question about whether the state can address new priorities without adding another layer of spending. Much of a budget is deter- mined before the finance minister enters parliament. Public servants must be paid, pensions honoured, health- care delivered, contractual obligations fulfilled and debt serviced. Many reflect essen- tial responsibilities and legiti- mate social commitments. The difficulty arises because new measures are generally easier to introduce than old meas- ures are to redesign. A grant creates beneficiaries, a subsidy creates expectations, and pro- grammes become embedded in institutions. The budget risks becoming an accumula- tion of past decisions rather than an expression of present needs. Some obligations are legally binding, others politi- cally entrenched, and still oth- ers survive because nobody is tasked with questioning them. Treating all three as equally untouchable obscures where meaningful choices remain. Inertia This is the political economy of inertia. The benefits of exist- ing measures are concentrated among people who know what they stand to lose. The costs are dispersed among taxpay- ers, future generations and competing priorities. Remov- ing or reforming a programme therefore generates visible re- sistance, while maintaining it rarely generates comparable scrutiny. Governments of every political persuasion face this asymmetry. It helps explain why budgets tend to be ad- ditive—a new incentive here, an additional allowance there, another scheme to address a problem that an earlier inter- vention failed to solve. Each expense may be defensible yet collectively inconsistent with changing needs. A policy in- troduced as temporary relief can quietly become a perma- nent entitlement. The fact that it once addressed a genuine problem does not establish that it remains the best instrument for addressing it today.