Adjusted boundaries for better planning

The Standing Committee on Development Planning is currently debating the rationalisation exercise that will define, in a permanent manner, the boundaries sealing off the development zone.

In 1988, the government had set up a Temporary Provisions Scheme (TPS) as a stop-gap planning regime to rein in the sprawl and reverse development excesses. It has always been clearly established by Parliament that once the necessary planning infrastructure, including the Structure Plan, was in place, this quick and temporary exercise was to be revisited to address planning and social anomalies that resulted from the TPS.

The process of changes to the development boundaries started in 1993 with the preparation of the local plans by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority. The government was criticised, and possibly rightly so that the local plans have been too long in the making and what was described as "temporary" was in fact becoming permanent.

The government is now finalising the process by first taking stock of the work carried out by Mepa. Cabinet felt the issues that were not addressed by Mepa had to be dealt with by giving a clear direction itself, drawing up a set of criteria to close the boundaries chapter.

Given its sensitivity, this issue has brought with it an expected unpopularity and criticism, not least from people whose property did not make it into the scheme. At least 90 per cent of the requests made for land for development were refused. This is what makes Labour's cry wolf - that the exercise is a vote-catcher - so fallacious and weak.

The Malta Labour Party is the main speculator in this issue. Pathetically unprepared, the Labour camp's attitude is wishy-washy, taking no stand in a bid to please everyone across the board.

Opposition Leader Alfred Sant agreed this was one process the country had to go through, saying he intended to do it between 1996 and 1998. His "criteria" are that cases would be adjudicated on a case by case basis. No specific merits or rules were mentioned. How's that for vote catching, the carrot being the hope of goalposts being shifted?

To put the record straight, these are the facts about the rationalisation exercise:

What the government is proposing amounts to a difference of 2.3 per cent over the area earmarked for development. Taking the Maltese islands as a whole, the adjustment works out to just 0.4 per cent of the total area. At least 46 per cent of the changes being proposed today were included in the local plans by Mepa. Twenty three per cent of the land included is already built, with a permit, giving rise to no further development. Roads and public spaces make up another 25 per cent of the area being included in the development zones. Towns and villages can now have well-defined boundaries.

Following two stages of public consultation - during the drawing up of the local plans and following Mepa's interpretation of the Cabinet criteria to propose the land for inclusion - the changes to the development boundaries have been endorsed by Mepa and the proposal is now being discussed by the Committee of the House and, in a few days' time, by Parliament itself.

This is the time for reckoning. Whether one agrees with it or not, the government has made its position clear and in a transparent manner. All the cards have been put on the table and the whole process is wide open to public scrutiny.

The government has been fully accountable to the people. Now it is the turn of the opposition to do likewise. I, not only as a minister but also as a citizen, am anxious to know what the Labour opposition's stand on the issue is. We expect an unequivocal declaration, shorn of rhetoric and conditional arguments.

We can then decide in a rational way.

Mr Pullicino is Minister for Rural Affairs and the Environment.