Mepa over the past year approved projects whose value was equivalent to 5.5 per cent of Malta's GDP, Environment Minister George Pullicino said in Parliament.

Opening the debate on the financial estimates of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (Mepa), the minister said that over the past year the authority had achieved a lot more with much less. The team which oversaw large projects concluded the process for more than 450 development applications, 47 of which involved hotels and other large projects, such as those at Cottonera and Tigné having a value in excess of Lm100m.

Mr Pullicino said government proposals for change in Mepa were very different from those of the opposition.

The Labour opposition wanted the central government to have wider powers to revise authority decisions. It wanted to regain the powers it had in the 1970s and 1980s. Yet in an article on November 4, opposition spokesman Roderick Galdes did not mention his party's proposal to increase government power when it came to permits, especially regarding planning. The people knew the price the country had to pay when it was the government which held sway over building permits in the 1970s and 1980s.

Labour MP Roderick Galdes said both sides agreed on the need for Mepa to be reformed.

This did not mean that the authority had not done a lot of good over the years. But, unfortunately, the people were suffering as a result of excessive bureaucracy, interference and operational problems at the authority. There were instances where people applied for alterations to windows or balconies and had to wait for months for a permit.

The situation was such that the people had lost confidence in this institution. A colleague of his in a survey of 700 people for a thesis found that only 10 to 15 per cent expressed confidence in Mepa. Reforms, he said, were mentioned year after year but the problems had persisted and the authority's audit officer report indicated acute problems. What steps had the minister taken to start eliminating them?

Mr Galdes said the government proposal to have a golf course at Xaghra l-Hamra went directly against the concept of sustainable development, and it now appeared that the government could be backing off because of the furore that had been raised. This was a site which included important water aquifers, yet the minister had backed the golf course proposal.

The Labour government, Mr Galdes said, had introduced reforms at Mepa in 1997 and the country had not returned to the 1970s and 1980s, when the concept of sustainable development did not exist.

The problems at Mepa were not the employees. They were up to their necks in work trying to meet targets.

And sending the receptionist for training did not solve Mepa's problems. There had to be a reform based on decision-making. Policies, he said, were being drawn up but enforcement started to slip after some time.

By not giving direction, the government was allowing absolute stagnation.

Mepa was supposed to be autonomous, but autonomy was no longer mentioned, because the authority had become the political ball of the Environment Ministry.

If the government wanted a serious reform, it should see what the authority's problems were and what the people were feeling.

On the Reconsiderations Section, he said that case officers were not keeping up with work and as a result people were not getting the service they were paying for. Why were reconsiderations decided by the same board which decided the original applications?

The Labour Party spent six months on consultation meetings about Mepa and the environment, and one of the concerns expressed was over the Forward Planning Unit.

Mepa had come up with many development briefs but 80 per cent were not implemented by the government. Five of its local plans were also still awaiting approval. This was creating uncertainty.

The opposition wanted to transfer the Forward Planning Unit to the government, because the unit was there to give direction. The opposition was saying that the Forward Planning Unit should not remain within Mepa because this did not have the necessary power to implement plans.

Among the proposals this unit had come up with were the rehabilitation or redevelopment of the Fort Cambridge Area, Dock 1, Qui-si-Sana, a Luna Park, Ta' Qali, the Chalet, Fort Ricasoli and White Rocks. But the government lacked the will to implement.

It was therefore not true that the MLP wanted to turn the clock back. Labour wanted accountability and transparency and it did not want the government to get involved in the development application process. The minister should be able to revise decisions only in cases where there was no agreement on national policy. In such cases, what the government would decide would count because the government was democratically elected and was above Mepa.

Labour MP Joe Brincat said that Mepa should have a system through which automatic permits were granted for minor alterations, subject to established guidelines.

Dr Brincat said that during carnival two years ago, he had received an urgent call from Mepa, of which he was a board member, for assistance with the drawing up of DNOs. (Development Notification Orders issued for temporary or minor structures).

Yet, despite their urgency, the minister had still not approved them, as was his duty. The minister was keeping applications from being considered faster because he had still not approved the DNOs. Why had simple applications to wait a year before a permit was granted? This was the minister's and not Mepa's fault because Mepa depended on the minister's political direction. The same applied for the local plans, which remained drafts because they had not been approved by the minister. There was a time when Mepa used to turn down development permit applications because they went against those plans, but he had successfully argued that this could not happen because, by implication, the authority would be considering as being law something which was still in draft form.

It was clearly the government's duty to update the law. Mepa had its hands tied by legislation which it could not violate. Mepa could not change laws, it could only propose, but the government should assume its responsibilities.

The Labour MP reiterated his call, also made in another debate, that persons engaged in conducting environment impact assessments should not have a direct interest in the projects involved.

He also underlined the important role of NGOs for the environment, people's well-being and living standards and said they should be given assistance.

Joe Falzon (PN) said he was perturbed at opposition comments of political overtones at Mepa. The Mepa report made it obvious that its work over the years had led to great progress, and even the slightest change to present development policy could wreak havoc with all that success. He did not agree that Mepa should lose its autonomy. It was well known that all board sittings were open to all, but decisions must be taken at the end.

Of course people's perception of Mepa was mixed, because this depended on whether one's project was approved or one's objections were upheld. The concern underlying Mepa's every decision was the balance between sustainable development and the environment. The environment was important, but development created jobs with all their spin-off effects, so the top priority was the overall national interest.

Over the past year Mepa had made policies that gave direction to all, balancing between financial gain and protection of the environment.

There were several applications for projects outside development zones, especially with regard to agriculture. The authority needed people who knew the subject so that even here, the decisions taken would be the best in the circumstances.

With its decisions Mepa had a great contribution to make to shape up Malta's future, concluded Mr Falzon.

Winding up, Mr Pullicino said that in contrast to what Dr Brincat had said, earlier this year Parliament had approved changes to the Mepa Act.

Inconsistencies in development planning were rife not only in Malta but in all countries where authorities like Mepa existed. Although efforts would continue to be made to remove them, it was surreal to imagine succeeding to remove all inconsistencies forever.

Mr Pullicino said it was the MLP which was most inconsistent, however. Just two weeks after it issued a policy document on the environment which spoke against an airstrip in Gozo, Labour MP Anton Refalo said he was in favour of an airstrip in Gozo.

The MLP statement also said that the central government should have the right to review any Mepa decision. Would this not amount to turning the clock back? This made the opposition obsolete. The current situation was that there were a number of phases during which the government could disagree with something Mepa would have approved, but there was a very specific process for this.

Mr Galdes had also said that 80 per cent of development briefs had not been activated. Mr Pullicino said development briefs on national projects were discussed at the Cabinet Committee for National Projects. The government had set up an Environment Policy and Initiatives Directive to ensure that its feedback would arrive at Mepa.

Mr Pullicino said efficiency at the authority was improving. The number of applications processed this year had increased by seven per cent. Reconsiderations had increased by 13 per cent, at a time when cases pending stood at 1,500.

Approved applications had increased from 72 to 75 per cent. Mepa's revenue had increased by almost Lm500,000. The rate of DNOs accepted had increased from 58 to 66 per cent. But the government was still not happy and would continue to press for expedition.

Mepa had paid one third less overtime than last year. It was doing a lot more than the opposition was ready to give it credit for.

Mr Pullicino said that on Tuesday Mepa approved a management plan with Nature Trust for the Dwejra area to be managed with greater respect for the environment.

Next year a revised Structure Plan would be issued.

Three audits had been done, including one on case officers' reports, where it was found that six per cent of case officers' reports were considered inadequate especially in policy interpretation.

Some 11 per cent of architects' development applications were also considered as being of an unacceptable standard. Some architects should be more careful about their applications vis-à-vis what they had discussed with their customers.

There was still too much of a negative attitude among case officers, who tended to recommend refusal of applications instead of leading them to approval.

The management efficiency report held that cells must be established with various units so that there would not be multiple queues for the same files. This would be taken in hand next March. Once the 30 days for consultation were up, any file would continue on its way.

The opposition had said nothing about IT, on which so much work had been done to facilitate applicants' research. All Mepa information was available on its website; a far cry from the time of the Labour government. He said he wished every government entity would be as open as Mepa.

Mr Pullicino said there were mixed results on enforcement. There were over 600 case where illegal development was removed, some by the owners themselves at the instigation of the case officers and others after enforcement notices were issued. But, said Mr Pullicino, he was still not happy even though it was much more than Labour had achieved.

A report showed there were more than 3,000 cases awaiting direct action. A solution was urgently needed to bring down this number.

Over the past year more than 1,000 enforcement notices were issued, including hundreds regarding illegal development in the countryside where Mepa should direct most of its efforts. It was very telling that Mepa enforcement no longer made the headlines.

Mepa had taken direct action on the removal of air-conditioners on façades in Valletta: from 1,055 units identified, owners had removed one third of them after a letter from Mepa. The authority would remove the others and those who had not heeded the warnings would be sorry.

The maximum fine which may be imposed when developers sought to get illegal development sanctioned would be raised from the current Lm1,000 to Lm10,00 because one could no longer have a situation where developers pressed on with building without a permit and became liable to a fine of only Lm1,000.

On the environment Dr Brincat said this was far from being the government's Cinderella, as the opposition had claimed. Cinderella would certainly not have minded being in the same situation as the environment in Malta, where investment had increased by 40 per cent.

One of Mepa's major projects on the environment over the past year was a strategy on a system of environmental permits in conformity with guidelines to control emissions and adequately dispose of waste.

€3 million provided by the EU were being used for the purchase of air-monitoring equipment and Mepa was also improving its administrative capacity with regard to the environment. Malta was seeking to exploit EU membership not only in monetary terms but also in the opportunity this presented to make proposals on the environment.

Mr Pullicino said the Environment Protection Unit was working on new policies on biodiversity in a process which would involve stakeholders.

Part of the cliffs at Ta' Cenc had been scheduled in view of the large number of bird varieties that nest there.

Mepa had also worked with NGOs on the Environmental Initiatives in Partnership Programme, identifying sites that needed restoration. Eight projects had already been completed, and seven more were in the pipeline.

On golf courses Mr Pullicino rebutted Mr Galdes' contention that the government had bent Mepa's arm in order to have Xaghra l-Hamra identified as a site for a golf course. The final decision would be taken on the basis of reports which were still being drawn up.

Concluding, Mr Pullicino said mid-2006 would see the publication of new regulations on the management of building sites in order to reduce danger and inconvenience to neighbours. This would be preceded by consultations.

Concluding, he said he himself would spur Mepa to do more, but one must appreciate that the authority needed to work in a framework of complete scrutiny. It would be a mistake to look back and to let others have more power. To remain dynamic, Mepa must be able to adapt to the country's changing needs.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.