Enhancing transparency

The consultation process ran over the nine-month period, from April to December 2008. It was characterised by sessions organised by the Prime Minister himself with environmental non-governmental organisations, constituted bodies, other key stakeholders, five meetings with Mepa employees and through the exchange of studies/reports formulated by non-governmental organisations and other stakeholders aimed at sharing views about the proposed reform.

During this process, the government received official reactions which were also published and made available to the public. These include:

• A report prepared by The Today Public Policy Institute entitled: The Environmental Deficit: The Reform of Mepa and Other Environmental Authorities, published in April 2008;

• Mepa Reform - Change for Sustainable Growth, issued in June 2008 by Mepa;

• A set of recommendations put forward by a number of ENGOs (Flimkien Għal Ambjent Aħjar, Friends of the Earth (Malta), Gaia Foundation, Malta Organic Agriculture Movement, Ramblers Association of Malta and Save Wied Garnaw Action Group) entitled Towards Sustainable Development Planning in Malta, published in October 2008;

• A report submitted by the Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin in January 2009; and

• Proposals for the reform of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority, submitted by Mepa's Union for professional officers in March 2009.

In its proposals for Mepa reform, the TTPPI focuses on three mains areas, and the interconnections between them, which the institute deems as the key pillars of reform: Mepa's structure; the composition and selection of its boards and commissions; and Mepa's systems and procedures.

The report suggests that reforming the aforementioned areas would enhance transparency, effectiveness and accountability. The salient proposals made in terms of the three areas include:

Structure

• Current structure with environment and development planning together should be maintained as this facilitates coordination and communication between the two areas;

• An "equivalent decision-voice" should be given to the environment arm of Mepa by strengthening its resources' capacity; and

• Mepa should have a full-time executive chairman and the position of director-general should be suppressed.

Boards and commissions

• Selection of members should ensure no conflicts and interest and a wider representation of civil society;

• Mepa chairman together with DCCs' chairmen to be appointed by the Prime Minister after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition;

• Nominations for members on Mepa board and DCCs should be scrutinised by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on development planning;

Technical experts may be commissioned by the boards/commissions at the discretion of the latter to assist on a full-time basis. During such term of employment, the experts would not be allowed to undertake private practice.

Systems and procedures

• Improvements to the EIA process as well as in ODZ rules and UCA processes;

• A shift in Mepa's focus towards land conservation and environment protection;

• Ensuring an effective audit function.