The Nationalist Party said that it “strongly rejects the false, misleading and entirely incorrect accusations being made against Shadow Minister for Gozo Alex Borg, in relation to Fort Chambray.”

“The concession in question was approved unanimously by both sides of Parliament and concerns land that has long been earmarked for development,” said the PN.

In a statement, the Nationalist Party said that “the sole commitment of the Gozitan Members of Parliament from the Nationalist Party, as well as the PN’s team of candidates in Gozo, remains to continue working in the best interests of the Gozitan community and to safeguard Gozo’s historical heritage.”

In its response to the statement by The Coalition for Gozo, composed of the Gozitan eNGOs Din l-Art Helwa Ghawdex, Ghawdix and Wirt Ghawdex, the Nationalist Party issued the following points:

1. “The accusation that Shadow Minister Alex Borg is actively promoting the Fort Chambray project based on misleading statements is a clear misinterpretation by those assuming that his support for responsible development equates to unconditional approval of every aspect of any project. The PN’s position has always been, and remains, in favour of sustainable progress that respects Gozo’s history while bringing socio-economic benefits.

Any breaches or abuse must be addressed through firm enforcement and immediate rectification. To distort this balanced stance into claims of “promotion based on misinformation” is absurd. The PN has consistently called for a better outcome for Fort Chambray – a solution that strikes a balance between restoration, responsible use, and the public interest. As things stand, Fort Chambray is being lost.

2. Allegations have been made of historical inaccuracies and misleading references through the selective quoting of statements made by the PN MP during media appearances, in an attempt to create the impression that he is uninformed about the site’s history. Ironically, the same claims are themselves full of inaccuracies. It should be made clear that:

Fort Chambray’s heritage is complex, having undergone various phases of planning, use, and abandonment. To reduce all this to a single date or function is a disservice to history; Alex Borg’s reference to the Fort’s use by the Order of St John was taken out of context. He explained the broader historical narrative and the Fort’s intended role as a settlement – serving defencive, economic, and recreational purposes.

3. On the matter of public access obligations, the Shadow Minister for Gozo never stated that there is a contractual clause guaranteeing public access, nor that the current contract contains any absolute obligation. What he did say was that any future development plan should include greater community involvement. He expressed a desire for increased public benefit, not a claim of an existing legal obligation.

4. With regard to the restoration of the Fort Chambray ditch, Alex Borg has always been clear that comparisons with the Mdina ditch were aspirational, not contractual obligations. Gozo lacks well-managed public spaces for families to enjoy, and Fort Chambray could be one of them. His comment aimed to highlight a creative way for the public to enjoy historical heritage rather than leave it in a state of neglect.

5. The greatest distortion of the truth lies in what is being said about the British Barracks, where panic is being fuelled by claims that the entire building will be demolished. However, the plans show that the structure is to be professionally relocated – as has been done in other cases in Malta and Gozo.

Alex Borg has always stressed the need for balance: to protect historical elements while allowing the Fort to be developed in a way that benefits Gozo. Refusing to consider partial relocation as a valid solution reflects a lack of flexibility and a selective approach.

6. Regarding the financing of fortification restoration, Alex Borg was accused of not saying the truth when he stated that developers would fund the restoration. In truth, Alex Borg said that in situations where heritage is of national importance, a public-private partnership could be a way to finance the restoration.

7. On allegations concerning the Qbajjar Battery and other sites, the Shadow Minister’s references to these locations were intended to highlight a broader pattern of failed or neglected conservation initiatives. Contrary to what is being claimed, Alex Borg never placed blame on a single entity. He simply pointed out how, time and again, responsibility for these sites is lost. The accusations avoid the real issue: we need better management of our heritage.

8. It must be clear that Alex Borg has never opposed the conservation of Gozo’s heritage. In fact, he has clearly expressed his support for the responsible restoration of Fort Chambray in a way that benefits local communities through a modern, accessible, and regenerated site. It is unjust to accuse him of seeking to destroy historical sites.”

The Nationalist Party stated that “while deploring personal attacks and baseless accusations, the party invites all stakeholders to collaborate constructively and urges them to focus on what truly matters.”

These include:

· “The conservation of key historical elements of Fort Chambray in any development;

· Ensuring that local communities are genuinely given a voice in shaping the future of the Fort;

· Transparent and responsible investment in fortifications, public services, and the conservation of Gozo’s historical heritage.”

The PN concluded by inviting all stakeholders “to engage in fact-based dialogue. Because the PN holds Gozo’s heritage close to heart, it is ready to work with everyone to find balanced and sustainable solutions for the island of Gozo, and expects others to do the same.”

File photo: PN

Permalink: PN “condemns Fort Chambray disinformation campaign and attacks on Gozo Shadow Minister”