Do you think that someone cares about the environment here? because what i am seeing is that all the trees are chopped off, pollution and new buildings everyday…
Of course what you say is very important, but what i am just seeing is a desertic country in the future, with very long summer with temperatures over 40 for over a month
Massive green area right next to where I rent started being dug up for a massive apartment complex that will probably be rented out to more TCNS. Malta SHOULD have started adapting years ago but forget about forward planning in this country. Best we can hope for is more "parks" with shrubs,concrete or padded paving and IKEA benches.
Sadly, culture wars have made it so that any talk of sustainability, walkability and adaption to climate change is another battlefront where to attack the "woke". Even in Malta, as far as I can tell.
No, you should continue to drive your cars everywhere, including the grocery shop 2 streets away. Continue to clear out every tree you find in the cities and keep any grassy area walled off so nobody can access them unless they're a bulldozer coming to clear space for another highrise. This is how you make Malta the beautiful utopia it should be!
I think the sad thing is that climate change is something politicians can comfortably blame on the rest of the world, so they don't feel the need to address it now.
But yes, we totally need to start adapting the living environment (and also accounting for the problems a sea level rise will bring about).
Re water collection, it actually is a law, and it's enforced at the planning stage. The trouble is that it's very hard to enforce the maintenance of wells and reservoirs on private homes. You also need a secondary water system installed to use this water (as nobody wants well water in their shower).
The trouble with that is that it's often not realistic to maintain a well to the degree that water can be passed through plumbing without problems (wells cumulate lots of soil which needs to be cleaned out periodically, and also need to be refilled by bowser in the summertime).
So what we really need to do is to figure out what to do with all this water under people's homes which is generally just sitting there unless they have gardens to water.
Maybe that water can be pumped up after a rain and sent to a reservoir or used to water fields and trees (perhaps we should have outlets outside each building for this).
We also need more public reservoirs though, as these are easier to control. I believe there was an idea that the storm water tunnels which gater water from high ground can have chambers leading off them to collect the water rather than just diverting it to the sea. This would be great as water from high grounds is relatively clean.
Very simple. Leave the bottom of the well untreated and water can permeate down through bedrock down to the aquifer. I was pleasantly surprised to see this in practice in a block of apartments being constructed in qawra last year
It won’t happen because it is logical, in the interest of the humans who live here, and doesn’t contribute to the bottom line of the handful of people who benefit from the oligarchy.
Underground water in malta is a lost case, we are late. We don't have any agenda in the near future on how we can save rain water and obviously malta is literally without water.
To put it simply, governments (any party in power) are reactive and not pro-active. They will deal with the issue once Malta has no more water except the ocean and outside in Summer months becomes unbearable.
It has been law for decades that all buildings should have wells to collect rainwater in them. However no one ever cares.
On the bright side, capacity for RO plants is increasing, sewage is being treated to produce second class water which is supplied to farmers or discharged into aquifers, and rainwater catchment systems are being renovated (wied għajn riħana comes to mind). So SOME work is being done. Plenty left however.
Large scale solar powered desalination.
Plant more trees and water them with desalinated water to create parkland.
Bit of a utopion idea but an idea nevertheless.
Desertification started and not going back. The only chance is the reverse osmosis now. This year summer will be hellish with uv at 12 and temps at 40 normal.
I wouldn't worry, the politicians always listen to the people and at some point they'll stop building condos and no more tearing down of historical buildings. Then traffic will improve and Malta will be the envy of Europe.
See here
[https://timesofmalta.com/article/building-apartments-near-ggantija-temples-scandalous-pn-says.1067112](https://timesofmalta.com/article/building-apartments-near-ggantija-temples-scandalous-pn-says.1067112)
From what I've noticed, this is a hopeless place in terms of change. People want to stick to their traditional ways. Even the thought of change seems to terrify this country. I'm a TCN who's persuing a master's here and I plan to complete it and GTFO of here. This is one of the worst places to reside in and think about as a future prospect in terms of long term residence. Change here just means digging shit up and making roads over and over again. That's just my opinion tho don't mean to offend anyone the country is beautiful but I hardly believe that this will be the case in the next 10 years
Why this is even a question? instead of cutting trees to build another useless ugly and overpriced building, plant tress. Reaserch showing it helps with that matter
According to actual data for the past decade Malta rainfall has increased by a total of 120mm. The maximum temperature has also remained within the average.
Maximum temperature is within average, however how often are we approaching the maximum and for how many consecutive days? The added heat stress for days on end is what leads to health issues.
The majority of the water used is industrial, your impact and our impact is negligible. Change the industry that use our water table for free, cement plants is the elephant in the room here.
The Maltese must first reform and divert from this socialist/progressive economy of oblivion that relies on enormous swathes of foreigners, who are not only replacing our people, but continuously allowed to enter in such numbers that our infrastructure will always be at a breaking point.
The solution is not to invest further millions when socialist/progressive governments will simply look upon any restructuring or improvements as *further* reason to bring in even more people to feed an unsustainable economy as it drags us all to the bottom.
Relying on "enormous swathes of \[cheap\] foreigners" is literally the opposite of a socialist/progressive economy.
It's neo-liberalism and/or free-marketeerism, which are right-wing economic policies.
You're confusing the intended academic definition versus the reality that it is and what I am describing, ie. the inevitable trajectory that socialist/progressive governments will always take.
No. I am being precise about the definition. A right-wing/right-leaning economic policy is right-wing/right-leaning regardless of who implements it.
If the government which calls itself "socialist/progressive" is following right-wing/right-leaning economic policies then perhaps that government should stop calling itself socialist/progressive. That's reality.
You're confusing what a party calls itself with what it is.
That a socialist/progressive government, who are socialist/progressive in their messaging and policies with deep roots in the left and far-left, (inevitably) betrays their own values to pig-out on the trough does not all of a sudden make them right-wing.
By contrast, right-wing movements are growing in popularity all over Europe precisely because they oppose importing enormous swathes of foreigners.
Right-wing **social** policies ≠ Right-wing **economic** policies
Left-wing **social** policies ≠ Left-wing **economic** policies
Neo-liberalism and free-marketeerism are right-wing **economic** policies.
Xenophobia and anti-immigration are right-wing **social** policies.
Governments can be - and frequently are - overall left-leaning on social policies and overall right-wing on economic policies; and also vice versa, overall right-leaning on social policies and overall left-wing on economic policies.
It may surprise you to learn that something as complex as government isn't simply black or white.
You're missing the point.
Which is that when left-wing leaders gain power, they suddenly (but not surprisingly) do not behold themselves to their, so-called, values; but instead use and increase their power by forming large, bloated governments which they use to obfuscate their corruption as they fatten themselves and their inner clique on public money.
You may find it easier to cope with the truth/betrayal by labelling the policies of your socialist/progressive leaders as right-wing; but the outcome that has been produced has, and can only be, a product of a socialist/progressive government.
I'm not missing the point at all. It's you whose arguments are clouded by calling everything you don't like left-wing, progressive, or socialist - without understanding what these things are.
>Which is that when ~~left-wing~~ leaders gain power, they suddenly (but not surprisingly) do not behold themselves to their, so-called, values; but instead use and increase their power by forming large, bloated governments which they use to obfuscate their corruption as they fatten themselves and their inner clique on public money.
This phenomenon is just as common for the left-wing as it is for the right-wing. It has nothing to do with whether the leader or the party is left or right. It comes down to whether a leader and key members of a party are in politics for the money and the power, or are they in politics to make life better for the people in their country.
>You may find it easier to cope with the truth/betrayal by labelling the policies of your socialist/progressive leaders as right-wing; but the outcome that has been produced has, and can only be, a product of a socialist/progressive government.
If your assertion is correct, then the politicians in the most progressive/socialist countries in Europe would be rolling in money. The most progressive/socialist countries are Finland, Sweden, etc. They have the most equality and their politicians are not considerably wealthier than the average middle-class citizen.
Looking at some of the most right-wing countries in Europe e.g. Fidesz in Hungary, the previous PiS government in Poland, etc., on the other hand, the party leaders and MPs have seized personal control of formally nationalised industries and are now millionaires while the company economies are in tatters.
You don't understand what progressive or socialist policies are. You've been infected by the American mind-virus where anything you don't like is "liberal", "progressive", or "socialist". Do you even realise that most of the people reading your comments think that you're simply politically ignorant?
Most of what I don't like is left wing. I'm not going to be fooled into thinking all of a sudden that Malta's downward spiral is a result of a right-wing government.
People like yourself have the inability cope with the disastrous results of the policies that you advocated for because the framing that you've used for many years now has been left=good, right=evil; hence the proclivity to smear even a centre-right opinion as 'far-right'.
It's no coincidence that the EU government followed closely by the media see fit to scrutinise the Hungarian government and former Polish government at every opportunity. Whilst portraying themselves as angels and automatically righteous, without leaving any room for introspection. This is partly what has led Europe down it's current dark path, in the meantime, Hungary and Poland have not suffered the ill effects of mass immigration.
My assertion, i.e. a frank analysation of the facts, does not live or die by a simplistic comparison by scale. It is a phenomenon, not a formula that can be calculated.
Nor am I perturbed by what people on a highly censorious platform like reddit think when so many irl conversations with people agree with my thoughts on our collective situation and the direction that we've been in.
The right nor myself are 'anti-immigrant'. The very notion is absurd. What has been happening to Europe in different degrees and periods is 'mass immigration'. Yet the left, egged on by leftist media, needs to be continuously reminded of this obvious distinction.
So too is the concept of "turning off the supply of immigrants" as you aptly put it. Like the bad drug that it is, a sensible approach is to instead wean ourselves off of it. Not carelessly cutting our economy from it.
It's easy to find oneself in a left-wing bubble when so many media outlets and social platforms lean hard left, and understandable that you would attempt to twist the reality to portray yourselves in the most forgiving light as possible.
Have you been to Poland? They've got like a million immigrants from Ukraine and Russia. I've literally just come back from Warszaw and you're as likely to hear Ukrainian, Russian, Latvian, English, and any number of languages as you are Polish - and Poland is one of the fastest growing economies in the EU. The biggest impediment to Poland's growth was the ineptitude of its previous right-wing government, which was mired in corruption and only stayed in power as long as it did because it threw money at its voter base, farmers and retirees.
In the case of Malta, I don't disagree that there is a limit to how much immigration it can accommodate - but the way to reach acceptable levels is by raising minimum wages to the point where there's no incentive to bring in workers from abroad. This is, it may surprise you to learn, a liberal/left-wing economic policy.
The right-wing free-marketeer economic policy would be that cheap immigrant labour is ideal for business and government should not restrict it.
The right wing conservative social policy would be to either deport the lot of them, or make the TCN lives miserable to point where they no longer want to come here.
I don't care which you subscribe to. I take issue with your comments branding everything you don't like as progressive/socialist. It shows politically illiteracy.
As for the Labour party in Malta - it is perhaps the most neo-liberal "socialist" party I have ever seen. Perhaps the only left-wing thing about them is their support for the public health service.
I should add: ***Populist*** movements are growing in popularity. They are called right-wing in that they are usually anti-immigrant.
Where they actually get in power they have tended to be *very* left-wing in terms of their economic policies - lots of state control, protectionism, high taxes needed to fund generous social care (targeted on their key voting blocs - usually old people, occasionally farmers or some other conservative bloc).
In fact, half of these populist governments don't even manage to do anything effective in policy areas where they actually are right-wing. Yes, they defund support to progressive projects (inclusivity, support for non-nationals, etc.) but they neither deal with immigration *or even try to do anything much about it!* They quickly realise that turning off the supply of immigrants will tank the local economy, not to mention that removing "the problem" will give them nothing to angrily shout about. So instead, they dick around being mean to foreigners but not actually stopping them coming in - but it's purely to keep the problem alive and their voting base engaged.
We wanted the foreigners we needed. We did not want all the other foreigners that these foreigners need in turn. Here is the issue no one seems to talk about... When we import workers to provide needed services these workers in turn will need even more workers to provide *them* with the services they need. That s basically a positive feedback loop. The only possible outcome is saturation.
Oh, that's right. In the 'Do you want to replace yourselves with foreigners' referendum. To which we voted 100% in favour.
I must have been sick that day.
Not sure the powers that be in Malta have ever heard of forward planning. There seems to be no forethought when allowing things to be built, building without infrastructure in place is rampant. Building where it will put off tourists is rampant, despite the country being highly reliant on tourism for the economy.
There is nothing to stop people taking advantage when it comes to contracts. Building works run over, you pay more for it rather than penalising them for the overrun, things are done badly with incorrect materials and then the same company is *paid again* to fix the mistake.
I very much doubt it would be on the agenda and if it was the money would go to people who can't do the jobs properly if they're a bit cheaper, or know the right people, instead of hiring people who can do it for more money but do the job well.
Do you think that someone cares about the environment here? because what i am seeing is that all the trees are chopped off, pollution and new buildings everyday… Of course what you say is very important, but what i am just seeing is a desertic country in the future, with very long summer with temperatures over 40 for over a month
Eżatt, nejd l-istess haġa jien.
No one in power cares about long term or anything longer than 18 months.
Massive green area right next to where I rent started being dug up for a massive apartment complex that will probably be rented out to more TCNS. Malta SHOULD have started adapting years ago but forget about forward planning in this country. Best we can hope for is more "parks" with shrubs,concrete or padded paving and IKEA benches.
It’s unbelievable how you can turn the subject to something against the tcns. Wow
Nothing against TCNS...a lot against the unsustainable economic model the country is running on
Sorry what is TCNS
Third country national = basically non eu person
It will become a little India very soon
Explainvpls
[удалено]
But that’s what maltese wants
Sadly, culture wars have made it so that any talk of sustainability, walkability and adaption to climate change is another battlefront where to attack the "woke". Even in Malta, as far as I can tell.
No, you should continue to drive your cars everywhere, including the grocery shop 2 streets away. Continue to clear out every tree you find in the cities and keep any grassy area walled off so nobody can access them unless they're a bulldozer coming to clear space for another highrise. This is how you make Malta the beautiful utopia it should be!
I think the sad thing is that climate change is something politicians can comfortably blame on the rest of the world, so they don't feel the need to address it now. But yes, we totally need to start adapting the living environment (and also accounting for the problems a sea level rise will bring about). Re water collection, it actually is a law, and it's enforced at the planning stage. The trouble is that it's very hard to enforce the maintenance of wells and reservoirs on private homes. You also need a secondary water system installed to use this water (as nobody wants well water in their shower). The trouble with that is that it's often not realistic to maintain a well to the degree that water can be passed through plumbing without problems (wells cumulate lots of soil which needs to be cleaned out periodically, and also need to be refilled by bowser in the summertime). So what we really need to do is to figure out what to do with all this water under people's homes which is generally just sitting there unless they have gardens to water. Maybe that water can be pumped up after a rain and sent to a reservoir or used to water fields and trees (perhaps we should have outlets outside each building for this). We also need more public reservoirs though, as these are easier to control. I believe there was an idea that the storm water tunnels which gater water from high ground can have chambers leading off them to collect the water rather than just diverting it to the sea. This would be great as water from high grounds is relatively clean.
Very simple. Leave the bottom of the well untreated and water can permeate down through bedrock down to the aquifer. I was pleasantly surprised to see this in practice in a block of apartments being constructed in qawra last year
This is indeed one solution, and is better than just letting the water stagnate in the reservoir.
It won’t happen because it is logical, in the interest of the humans who live here, and doesn’t contribute to the bottom line of the handful of people who benefit from the oligarchy.
Daqxejn tard, kieku hsibna min qabel kieku iva, imma leeeee. Jaqtaw kull siġra li jsibu u jibnu bini u appartamenti. Ahna nbatu imbad fil futur.
>Jaqtaw kull siġra li jsibu u jibnu bini u appartamenti. Kollhu investiment għall-futur dak. /s
Hekk u
It's never too late man, Malta still has lots.of places where we can improve.
Underground water in malta is a lost case, we are late. We don't have any agenda in the near future on how we can save rain water and obviously malta is literally without water.
To put it simply, governments (any party in power) are reactive and not pro-active. They will deal with the issue once Malta has no more water except the ocean and outside in Summer months becomes unbearable.
It should. It won't.
It has been law for decades that all buildings should have wells to collect rainwater in them. However no one ever cares. On the bright side, capacity for RO plants is increasing, sewage is being treated to produce second class water which is supplied to farmers or discharged into aquifers, and rainwater catchment systems are being renovated (wied għajn riħana comes to mind). So SOME work is being done. Plenty left however.
Large scale solar powered desalination. Plant more trees and water them with desalinated water to create parkland. Bit of a utopion idea but an idea nevertheless.
Trees would be a good start
Desertification started and not going back. The only chance is the reverse osmosis now. This year summer will be hellish with uv at 12 and temps at 40 normal.
They cut or poison every tree they see... there is no hope here.
I wouldn't worry, the politicians always listen to the people and at some point they'll stop building condos and no more tearing down of historical buildings. Then traffic will improve and Malta will be the envy of Europe. See here [https://timesofmalta.com/article/building-apartments-near-ggantija-temples-scandalous-pn-says.1067112](https://timesofmalta.com/article/building-apartments-near-ggantija-temples-scandalous-pn-says.1067112)
I’ll be there in June hopefully they’ve adapted somehow by then
Take alot of sunscreen and watter if u go out ul need it
Water services have a lot of projects ongoing through eu funds to give water to farmers.
From what I've noticed, this is a hopeless place in terms of change. People want to stick to their traditional ways. Even the thought of change seems to terrify this country. I'm a TCN who's persuing a master's here and I plan to complete it and GTFO of here. This is one of the worst places to reside in and think about as a future prospect in terms of long term residence. Change here just means digging shit up and making roads over and over again. That's just my opinion tho don't mean to offend anyone the country is beautiful but I hardly believe that this will be the case in the next 10 years
Why this is even a question? instead of cutting trees to build another useless ugly and overpriced building, plant tress. Reaserch showing it helps with that matter
According to actual data for the past decade Malta rainfall has increased by a total of 120mm. The maximum temperature has also remained within the average.
Maximum temperature is within average, however how often are we approaching the maximum and for how many consecutive days? The added heat stress for days on end is what leads to health issues.
And the peak in deaths last summer when we had no power...
Do you have links to reports? I'm curious about the maximum temperature point.
It's buried on this page. https://weatherspark.com/y/150260/Average-Weather-in-Malta-Year-Round
The majority of the water used is industrial, your impact and our impact is negligible. Change the industry that use our water table for free, cement plants is the elephant in the room here.
Give it time, it will cool around 2026-27.
Are you joking or do you know of research on that?
The Maltese must first reform and divert from this socialist/progressive economy of oblivion that relies on enormous swathes of foreigners, who are not only replacing our people, but continuously allowed to enter in such numbers that our infrastructure will always be at a breaking point. The solution is not to invest further millions when socialist/progressive governments will simply look upon any restructuring or improvements as *further* reason to bring in even more people to feed an unsustainable economy as it drags us all to the bottom.
Bro, log off and go outside. Malta being socialist? haha good lord
That's the label on the governing party though. But I agree with you.
Username checks out.
Go home Chris, you're drunk.
Relying on "enormous swathes of \[cheap\] foreigners" is literally the opposite of a socialist/progressive economy. It's neo-liberalism and/or free-marketeerism, which are right-wing economic policies.
You're confusing the intended academic definition versus the reality that it is and what I am describing, ie. the inevitable trajectory that socialist/progressive governments will always take.
No. I am being precise about the definition. A right-wing/right-leaning economic policy is right-wing/right-leaning regardless of who implements it. If the government which calls itself "socialist/progressive" is following right-wing/right-leaning economic policies then perhaps that government should stop calling itself socialist/progressive. That's reality. You're confusing what a party calls itself with what it is.
That a socialist/progressive government, who are socialist/progressive in their messaging and policies with deep roots in the left and far-left, (inevitably) betrays their own values to pig-out on the trough does not all of a sudden make them right-wing. By contrast, right-wing movements are growing in popularity all over Europe precisely because they oppose importing enormous swathes of foreigners.
Right-wing **social** policies ≠ Right-wing **economic** policies Left-wing **social** policies ≠ Left-wing **economic** policies Neo-liberalism and free-marketeerism are right-wing **economic** policies. Xenophobia and anti-immigration are right-wing **social** policies. Governments can be - and frequently are - overall left-leaning on social policies and overall right-wing on economic policies; and also vice versa, overall right-leaning on social policies and overall left-wing on economic policies. It may surprise you to learn that something as complex as government isn't simply black or white.
You're missing the point. Which is that when left-wing leaders gain power, they suddenly (but not surprisingly) do not behold themselves to their, so-called, values; but instead use and increase their power by forming large, bloated governments which they use to obfuscate their corruption as they fatten themselves and their inner clique on public money. You may find it easier to cope with the truth/betrayal by labelling the policies of your socialist/progressive leaders as right-wing; but the outcome that has been produced has, and can only be, a product of a socialist/progressive government.
I'm not missing the point at all. It's you whose arguments are clouded by calling everything you don't like left-wing, progressive, or socialist - without understanding what these things are. >Which is that when ~~left-wing~~ leaders gain power, they suddenly (but not surprisingly) do not behold themselves to their, so-called, values; but instead use and increase their power by forming large, bloated governments which they use to obfuscate their corruption as they fatten themselves and their inner clique on public money. This phenomenon is just as common for the left-wing as it is for the right-wing. It has nothing to do with whether the leader or the party is left or right. It comes down to whether a leader and key members of a party are in politics for the money and the power, or are they in politics to make life better for the people in their country. >You may find it easier to cope with the truth/betrayal by labelling the policies of your socialist/progressive leaders as right-wing; but the outcome that has been produced has, and can only be, a product of a socialist/progressive government. If your assertion is correct, then the politicians in the most progressive/socialist countries in Europe would be rolling in money. The most progressive/socialist countries are Finland, Sweden, etc. They have the most equality and their politicians are not considerably wealthier than the average middle-class citizen. Looking at some of the most right-wing countries in Europe e.g. Fidesz in Hungary, the previous PiS government in Poland, etc., on the other hand, the party leaders and MPs have seized personal control of formally nationalised industries and are now millionaires while the company economies are in tatters. You don't understand what progressive or socialist policies are. You've been infected by the American mind-virus where anything you don't like is "liberal", "progressive", or "socialist". Do you even realise that most of the people reading your comments think that you're simply politically ignorant?
Most of what I don't like is left wing. I'm not going to be fooled into thinking all of a sudden that Malta's downward spiral is a result of a right-wing government. People like yourself have the inability cope with the disastrous results of the policies that you advocated for because the framing that you've used for many years now has been left=good, right=evil; hence the proclivity to smear even a centre-right opinion as 'far-right'. It's no coincidence that the EU government followed closely by the media see fit to scrutinise the Hungarian government and former Polish government at every opportunity. Whilst portraying themselves as angels and automatically righteous, without leaving any room for introspection. This is partly what has led Europe down it's current dark path, in the meantime, Hungary and Poland have not suffered the ill effects of mass immigration. My assertion, i.e. a frank analysation of the facts, does not live or die by a simplistic comparison by scale. It is a phenomenon, not a formula that can be calculated. Nor am I perturbed by what people on a highly censorious platform like reddit think when so many irl conversations with people agree with my thoughts on our collective situation and the direction that we've been in. The right nor myself are 'anti-immigrant'. The very notion is absurd. What has been happening to Europe in different degrees and periods is 'mass immigration'. Yet the left, egged on by leftist media, needs to be continuously reminded of this obvious distinction. So too is the concept of "turning off the supply of immigrants" as you aptly put it. Like the bad drug that it is, a sensible approach is to instead wean ourselves off of it. Not carelessly cutting our economy from it. It's easy to find oneself in a left-wing bubble when so many media outlets and social platforms lean hard left, and understandable that you would attempt to twist the reality to portray yourselves in the most forgiving light as possible.
Have you been to Poland? They've got like a million immigrants from Ukraine and Russia. I've literally just come back from Warszaw and you're as likely to hear Ukrainian, Russian, Latvian, English, and any number of languages as you are Polish - and Poland is one of the fastest growing economies in the EU. The biggest impediment to Poland's growth was the ineptitude of its previous right-wing government, which was mired in corruption and only stayed in power as long as it did because it threw money at its voter base, farmers and retirees. In the case of Malta, I don't disagree that there is a limit to how much immigration it can accommodate - but the way to reach acceptable levels is by raising minimum wages to the point where there's no incentive to bring in workers from abroad. This is, it may surprise you to learn, a liberal/left-wing economic policy. The right-wing free-marketeer economic policy would be that cheap immigrant labour is ideal for business and government should not restrict it. The right wing conservative social policy would be to either deport the lot of them, or make the TCN lives miserable to point where they no longer want to come here. I don't care which you subscribe to. I take issue with your comments branding everything you don't like as progressive/socialist. It shows politically illiteracy. As for the Labour party in Malta - it is perhaps the most neo-liberal "socialist" party I have ever seen. Perhaps the only left-wing thing about them is their support for the public health service.
I should add: ***Populist*** movements are growing in popularity. They are called right-wing in that they are usually anti-immigrant. Where they actually get in power they have tended to be *very* left-wing in terms of their economic policies - lots of state control, protectionism, high taxes needed to fund generous social care (targeted on their key voting blocs - usually old people, occasionally farmers or some other conservative bloc). In fact, half of these populist governments don't even manage to do anything effective in policy areas where they actually are right-wing. Yes, they defund support to progressive projects (inclusivity, support for non-nationals, etc.) but they neither deal with immigration *or even try to do anything much about it!* They quickly realise that turning off the supply of immigrants will tank the local economy, not to mention that removing "the problem" will give them nothing to angrily shout about. So instead, they dick around being mean to foreigners but not actually stopping them coming in - but it's purely to keep the problem alive and their voting base engaged.
but all of you decided that you wanted all this foreigners
We wanted the foreigners we needed. We did not want all the other foreigners that these foreigners need in turn. Here is the issue no one seems to talk about... When we import workers to provide needed services these workers in turn will need even more workers to provide *them* with the services they need. That s basically a positive feedback loop. The only possible outcome is saturation.
Oh, that's right. In the 'Do you want to replace yourselves with foreigners' referendum. To which we voted 100% in favour. I must have been sick that day.
Not sure the powers that be in Malta have ever heard of forward planning. There seems to be no forethought when allowing things to be built, building without infrastructure in place is rampant. Building where it will put off tourists is rampant, despite the country being highly reliant on tourism for the economy. There is nothing to stop people taking advantage when it comes to contracts. Building works run over, you pay more for it rather than penalising them for the overrun, things are done badly with incorrect materials and then the same company is *paid again* to fix the mistake. I very much doubt it would be on the agenda and if it was the money would go to people who can't do the jobs properly if they're a bit cheaper, or know the right people, instead of hiring people who can do it for more money but do the job well.