The way forward

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi had indicated prior to the election that Mepa would fall fair and square within his remit. He has also indicated that, for the time being, all Mepa boards and authorities are to refrain from issuing any permits.

The Prime Minister's publicised intentions are to appraise the Mepa situation properly and see what needs to be done for it to regain the public's confidence. It is, of course, a shame that this was not done in the immediate days prior to the election, since this would have immediately stopped any idle gossip. Needless to say, it is also a shame that when one of the DCC (Development Control Commission) boards resigned 12 days prior to the election this same board was reconstituted within 72 hours. One must appreciate political necessities but enough about the past, unless it will come back to haunt the Prime Minister.

This is probably the most important change that has to be made, if the intentions are genuine.

The applicable legislation has to be introduced in such manner as to suspend all Mepa boards from sitting or issuing permits once an election date is announced. This will immediately stop idle gossip, especially if such legal proviso is carried with the rider that any permits issued during such time shall be deemed null and void. It is also high time that the word "shall" and the phrase "shall not" be included once and for all in the decision-making process of Mepa. Other phrases such as "overriding reasons" or "may" or "may not" are to be eliminated. Thus, for example, if the designated zoning of an area is residential then it is imperative that this remains so and no reasons for change of zoning be allowed on a case by case basis. If it is felt that a rezoning exercise is required than this should be done the right way and not by a simple board decision!

Streetscape has also become an issue and, to large extent, it is felt that the matter of streetscape has now lost its meaning. Unless my memory fails me, when the original structure plans were discussed and eventually implemented, the declared intention was to create a system that would be just with regard to applications that were to be approved in areas designated one way but in reality built in another way. The idea of the streetscape was to allow a deviation from the norm if other premises in the street allowed this. This system has failed.

It is time for the rules and regulations to become strict and to allow no exception. The norm has to become the rule once more. We have had far too many exceptions becoming the norm.

I say this not because in the past the system did not require some form of leeway or stretching. In fact, it was only through the use of the streetscape legislation that certain anomalies were corrected. However, the law is now over 15 years old and the need now for this kind of legislation is over and glaringly so.

We need rules and regulations that require no interpretation; that can only be understood as meaning one thing. If St Gerrard Street, Liverbirdland, is designated as having two floors, then so be it. No exceptions. Too much of our villages and towns have been ruined by incredibly wrong piecemeal speculation where such simple rules have been repeatedly broken. Here too the rule must be that any permit issued contrary to such regulations is invalid and Mepa, together with the developer, will be held directly responsible in damages.

It is also time that the role of board member be examined with a view to indicating precisely the requirements for such appointments.

The relative remuneration should also be re-examined in order to attract the right candidates. It might also be possible to examine the potential criminal responsibility for negligence if applicable regulations are blatantly ignored.

In this regard, it is necessary for the Prime Minister to bring in the right people on board when discussing potential changes. The environmental lobby, the planners, the Chamber of Architects, the Chamber of Advocates and any other interested party, including Mepa officials and employees, must be allowed to express their views without fear or favour.

Change that simply pays lip service to the electoral promise of change is not what is needed. We need to look at the Mepa changes holistically, with politics playing no part in the matter. Any changes need to be accomplished in the first few months of the legislature in order to avoid untoward influences creeping in. Environmental issues should not be vote catchers or losers. We need to act above that!