The Times Editorial 16th February 2009

Monday, 16th February 2009

Editorial

The pros and cons of an airstrip in Gozo

Periodically, the issue surfaces of whether there should be an airstrip in Gozo capable of taking fixed-wing aircraft. Gozo can be reached by air either by seaplane, as is happening now from the Grand Harbour, or by helicopter, as was the case for some time. The commercial helicopter service - more than one attempt was made - ceased in 2005 and the only access now by rotor blade aircraft is when the Armed Forces of Malta's Air Wing is called upon in an emergency.

Are the arrangements now in place adequate to meet Gozo's requirements? Is there really a need for a fixed-wing airstrip in Gozo capable of ferrying passengers quickly between Malta and Gozo?

The arguments in favour of some form of airstrip in Gozo for fixed-wing aircraft focus on one key factor: the economic and tourism benefits of having a regular, efficient and reliable service between the two islands. For these reasons, the Gozo Tourism Association and the Gozo Business Chamber - together with one or two entrepreneurial proponents - have been at the forefront of such proposals. The government and the Gozo Ministry have opted for a more guarded approach.

It is argued that a seaplane operation cannot function when it is dark or the sea is rough. It stops flying in the winter months for these reasons but also, presumably, because it is not financially viable to operate in the lean, off-tourism winter months.

On the other hand, the arguments against the airstrip proposal come down to three. Would a year-round fixed-wing operation be commercially viable? What would be the social and environmental impact? And does Gozo really need it, anyway?

The commercial argument is central but, in a sense, should not be the over-riding consideration for the government. A commercial carrier would weigh up the business risks of undertaking such a venture. It would benefit from commercial success and would go to the wall if the venture failed. Either way, it would be no skin off the government's nose.

The social and environmental impact is more sensitive and more difficult to weigh up. The extension of the helipad at Xewkija by building a short runway would undoubtedly have environmental repercussions.

There would be a loss of agricultural land to development, or - if the idea of using the secondary road behind the heliport were adopted - a further extension of what is essentially an industrial footprint in the heart of what is being branded as an "ecological island".

The real imponderable, however, is what a regular and extended air link would do to Gozo's special, if not unique, attraction today as an island that is rather unspoilt, quiet and "behind the times", though not in a negative sense. Is there a danger that opening up Gozo to that kind of commercial air link would succeed in its objective of maximising tourism income at the cost of destroying the unique selling point of Gozo as a slightly mysterious island apart, ultimately undermining the very tourism it was seeking to attract?

In making a judgement on the best way ahead for Gozo one must beware the law of unintended consequences. Is a fixed-wing link truly needed? On balance, it is difficult not to feel that such an operation may be desirable although it may not be essential. It is also hard to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that the present arrangements are undermining Gozo's core tourism business. On the contrary, it could be argued that by keeping Gozo slightly more difficult to reach, it actually enhances it.

GTA responds to comments on Gozo airlink

The Gozo Tourism Association refers to the editorial of the Times of Malta under the header The Pros and Cons of an airstrip in Gozo. In this opinion piece, the editor repeatedly implied that there is no real necessity for an airlink between the island of Gozo and mainland Malta.

The Gozo Tourism Association would like to remind the editor that the Government is forking out millions of euros to lure the low cost airlines to operate several routes not serviced by the legacy carriers, in order to make Malta more accessible to the potential tourists. Thus Government is acknowledging the fact that the success of the tourism industry depends also on further accessibility to the Maltese islands.

With the same reasoning, The Gozo Tourism Association is asking what is being done towards more access to the sister island of Gozo? The GTA has always argued that for Gozo the low cost carriers are a doubled edged knife. It is an acknowledged fact that the low cost carriers have improved the tourist numbers, but it is also a known fact that Gozo is losing out on the domestic market which is opting for breaks to destinations serviced by these airlines. Furthermore contrary to what is being done towards access in Malta, the island of Gozo experienced inconsistent, unfeasible and unrealiable airlinks previously operated by the helicopter and the present seaplane.

Furthermore the Gozo Tourism Association is conscious of and recognises the strength of island's unique character. However the GTA believes that the right balance is to be struck between maintaining Gozo's characteristics and sustaining the tourism industry which is the main economic pillar on Gozo.

The Gozo Tourism Association is not the enviromental expert. We are not either aviation experts. But we can proudly say that we are professionals and knowledgeable on what needs to be done to sustain the tourism sector on Gozo. We are, seasoned, experienced and tested daily and therefore our opinion should be heeded, if we want Gozo to remain as a tourist destination. Up to this present date, the Gozitan tourism trade was let down, with regards to the airlink between Malta and Gozo. No editorial board, whatever its agenda will ever understand the constraints of the Gozitan tourism industry, unless one lives it on a daily basis.

Finally the Gozo Tourism Association hopes that it was not the intention of the Times editorial to instigate another St. John's Co-Cathedral repeat.

The Gozo Tourism Association (The GOVANNA-Leaning Association)

The pros and cons of an airstrip in Gozo

I refer to the editorial in The Times of February 16, 2009 relating to the pros and cons of an airstrip in Gozo and to the article in your paper today.

This subject has been discussed many times in the past and while I agree that it would be convenient to have an air-shuttle service from Luqa to Gozo, a commercial venture would only be viable if it was heavily subsidised. Despite subsidies, the last service only managed to operate for a few months.

I think that it is grossly unfair for the people of Gozo and Malta to have to subsidize flights for tourists who can afford the prices, and business people whose flights are tax-deductible anyway!

Personally, I feel that as things stand now, the ferry connections are more than sufficient. In acute emergencies, an AFM helicopter is used. If business persons and well-off tourists really can't be bothered to travel on the ferry, they can always charter a private helicopter.

The sea plane is just a sight-seeing gimmick and serves no real purpose, except to disturb the peace and infringe on one's privacy.

If the hotel and tourist branch think that thousands of additional tourists will flock to Gozo if there is an air service, then I suggest that they are being taken for an expensive ride by their consultants, or are hallucinating!

From an environmental point of view - especially considering the 'ecological island' concept - one must realize that once the airstrip has been built it can never be 'un-built': that land will be destroyed forever.

Judging by what it costs to build roads on Gozo, the cost of extending the runway would run into millions of Euro. At present, the government cannot even keep the main arterial roads in a reasonable condition, so how on earth can they maintain an airstrip? Fixed wings planes cannot miss potholes like most helicopters can!

If a commercial fixed-wing venture failed, the government would be left with an expensive airstrip and no business - I would certainly not say that that was 'no skin off the government's nose'!

Once an airstrip has been built, it will also be utilized by flying schools and private planes. It would be very difficult to limit the use of the airstrip to one commercial company only. Even if this was possible, there would be so many 'exceptions' and 'emergency landings' that it would be a farce. Let us not kid ourselves with regard to the status of some residents.

I lived near a small airport on the outskirts of Munich for some years and I can assure you that the noise of small aircraft monotonously buzzing overhead is most irritating.

Thank goodness we only have a few visiting aircraft here at present (the float plane is unable to fly much in winter), however sitting in the sun and enjoying the bay at Xlendi on Monday afternoon there was one circling the area. Although it didn't bite like a mosquito, it had the same effect - one just wanted to swat it down!

The charm of Gozo is, as the editorial mentioned, the fact that it is still relatively unspoilt, fairly unique and slightly more difficult to reach! Let's keep it that way.

Many Maltese and foreigners have purchased property here because the island is so special - why?

Why do so many Gozitans who emigrated elsewhere in the world, always keep a foothold here on the island?

The tourists who visit the island - especially in the shoulder months and winter, when we need them most - are not looking for a stereotype destination. They want to enjoy the magnificent cliffs and ravines, the sparkling seas, thunder clouds and rainbows, wild flowers and fascinating rock formations, but possibly most of all, the peace and tranquillity they can find in the countryside. They most certainly do not want the noise pollution and invasion of privacy caused by noisy little aircraft!

Basically it boils down to:

Pros: convenience for the few, and

Cons: inconvenience to the whole population!

Lesley Kreupl

Gharb