Nine groups target Bengħajsa tender

Nine organisations have publicly challenged a government tender for a Bengħajsa land-reclamation master plan, arguing that even the study stage points toward another industrial expansion in an area already carrying much of the south-east’s burden.

The dispute is over tender MIEA/02/2026, issued by Malta Investments & Economic Advisory on behalf of the Economy Ministry. The document seeks a 12-month feasibility study for reclaiming land at the Bengħajsa shoal and assessing an industrial zone of 100,000 square metres in Marsaxlokk Harbour.

That is not yet a permit, and MIEA has said the tender does not authorise construction. It also said any eventual project would still need planning and environmental approvals, with consultation involving fishers, local councils and NGOs. But the nine groups are contesting something more basic than sequencing. Their complaint is that the state has already chosen the question — how to study reclamation for industrial use — without first asking whether this is a place that should be treated as available at all.

Their joint statement calls the proposal a direct threat to small-scale fishers who still work the coast around Wied ix-Xaqqa and Bengħajsa. According to the groups, industrial development inside Marsaxlokk Harbour has already narrowed where artisanal fishers can operate. Reclaiming the shoal for more industrial land would, they argue, push them out again.

That matters because this is not empty water in administrative language. The organisations describe the shoal as one of the last remaining areas where fishers with small boats can still earn a living. If that account is accurate, the argument is not about scenic loss. It is about whether economic planning is being built on the assumption that one set of livelihoods is negotiable and another is not.

The groups also say the tender was issued without prior consultation with the local community. That is a political choice before it is a technical one. Consultation promised after a feasibility tender can still shape a proposal, but it does not answer why the state moved first on industrial potential rather than on local consent.

Their environmental case is also concrete. The statement warns of sedimentation, pollution and altered sea currents, with possible consequences for water circulation in the harbour. It says reclamation would affect Posidonia oceanica meadows protected under the EU Habitats Directive and could damage the integrity of two Natura 2000 sites, one marine and one terrestrial.

Those claims would need testing in any formal assessment process. Still, this is exactly why the tender has drawn such resistance: once a ministry commissions a study around a specific development option, the burden often shifts onto residents and NGOs to prove why an idea under state sponsorship should stop. Officially, the decision has not been taken. Administratively, a direction already has.

The signatories are Marsaxlokk Heritage, BirdLife Malta, EcoMarine Malta, Federazzjoni tal-Għaqdiet tas-Sajjieda Dilettanti Malta, Għaqda Sajjieda Attivi, Għaqda Sajjieda Dilettanti B’Buġa, Għaqda Storja u Kultura Birżebbuġa, Moviment Graffitti and Nature Trust – FEE Malta.

They also point to what they describe as a contradiction in government messaging. Bengħajsa public park and Fort Bengħajsa had been presented as open spaces for public use. The tender, they argue, pulls in the opposite direction. It is a fair question, and a specific one: which promise governs this coastline when industrial demand and public access collide?