Kurt Sansone
Planning board not alien to polemic
Planning process drags on for nine years
The planning board that approved the permit for the extension of the controversial Baħrija farmhouse was the same one that resigned en masse just nine days before last year's general election.
The board had resigned after Mepa auditor Joe Falzon accused them of gross irregularities when they approved a permit for the construction of a supermarket in an outside development zone in Safi.
The former chairman of the board, architect Philip Azzopardi, yesterday refused to comment on yet another accusation by Mr Falzon that the board acted outside the law when it approved the extension to a farmhouse outside development zones in Baħrija in September 2007.
Mr Falzon said the DCC board had acted outside the law when it approved the extension because an additional screening process by the Environmental Protection Department was completely ignored despite being required by law.
The controversy has led to the resignation of Nationalist Party president Victor Scerri, who owns the house and who stepped down to be able to defend himself better. He has always denied any wrongdoing and said that if the permit was issued irregularly it was the planning authority's fault and not his.
In his reaction to Mr Falzon's observations, Mepa chairman Austin Walker said the authority had already informed the applicant that it intended withdrawing the last permit because it was issued erronously.
The other DCC board members at the time were Carmel J. Portelli, Anthony Mifsud, Charles Micallef St John, Charles Calleja and Christopher Spiteri.
In another controversial decision in November 2007, the same board had also approved the outline development permit for an open air disco in Mistra on land belonging to Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando.
On the Mistra case, Mr Azzopardi and Mr Mifsud are facing criminal proceedings in court accused of having had private interests in the adjudication process of the application.
The auditor said that no action could be taken against the DCC board members who approved the Baħrija permit because they had since been replaced.
The planning process for this farmhouse dragged on for nine years and the development was given the go ahead in four permits between 2000 and 2008. In the end, Dr Scerri was allowed to knock down the original farmhouse and build another one, a third larger than the original.
The auditor's accusing finger did not stop with the DCC board that approved the last permit in a series of four in the Baħrija case.
The first outline development permit was approved in August 2002 despite negative recommendations by the case officer and subsequently granted a full development permit in January 2003. In both instances the board ignored all of Mepa's environmental policy and approved site plans that did not take into account the sloping nature of the site in question.
According to Mepa's annual reports, the DCC board that approved both the applications was chaired by architect Catherine Galea. Contacted yesterday Ms Galea would not comment.
"I will be meeting the board secretary tomorrow (today) to give me the relevant information so that I can confirm that I was chairman of the board when the first permit was issued. I will only be in a position to answer your question when I get this information," she said when asked for her reaction to the auditor's report.
The other DCC board members at the time were Mariella Axisa, Andrew Ellul, Philip Mifsud, now a Nationalist MP, Anthony Mifsud, Conrad Thake and Ray Bondin.
The controversy came to a head on Wednesday when the government published the auditor's report, 24 hours after Dr Scerri resigned his political post.
Meanwhile, the Labour Party yesterday said the Prime Minister was obliged to publicly take a stand on the matter after the auditor's report accused the authority of damaging the environment.
It said the board that took the "scandalous" decision was appointed by Lawrence Gonzi.
"Lawrence Gonzi should declare whether he agrees with the auditor's report and, if yes, who would be shouldering political responsibility for all that happened," Labour environment spokesman Leo Brincat and planning spokesman Roderick Galdes said.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
16 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
C.Xerri
Jul 25th 2009, 08:43
A quick look at the Mepa website reveals several applications in UCA's where case officers recommend refusal and then the DCC Board overturns. Like has happened in the Bahrija case the applications are very often hidden behind other applicants' names. Could it be that this is done so that the connection of the architect or the applicant to members on the Board is not immediately obvious? Leaving the session when the voting is taken during a DCC meeting does not constitute impartiality and does not fool anybody because the lobbying can easily be done before. The DCC boards, whether A or B or C are very often doing a disservice to the weak and they have to be held accountable, whether they have resigned, been replaced or not. They must not be allowed to get away with such unprofessional behaviour whether on big projects or small projects.
Press on NGOs and uncover more of these abuses, although the word hnizrijiet in maltese describes them better.
E.A. Mallia
Jul 24th 2009, 18:59
I am not so sure the auditor is correct about the immunity of the now-defunct DCC board. Three NGOs are currently undertaking legal action against the members of the Strategic Environment Assessment board used by the then Minister George Pullicino and MEPA to hurry the passage of the new development zones- those intended to put an end to ODZ deveopments! The action is against the board and the three members in their personal capacity. No one has suggested that this cannot be done, not even the three members themselves. So why should the ex-DCC people be immune?
c. camilleri
Jul 24th 2009, 15:42
Yes somebody should shoulder the responsibility whether they resigned or not.
Unless things are taken more seriously and those responsible are accountable for their actions, abuses will continue. The problem is that a lot of fuss is made when these surface but those responsible are never brought to court. It is about time that we have laws which mete harsh penalties to abusers.
Wiflred L Camilleri
Jul 24th 2009, 15:06
The auditor said that no action could be taken against the DCC board members who approved the Baħrija permit because they had since been replaced. What a load of bull! These individuals should be held accountable regardles of their resignations or forced resignations. Otherwise, their replacements can turn around and do the same thing all over again and then conviniently resign to get away with it! Using the auditor's logic, can a thief rob a bank and then claim that he has resigned from being a thief and get away with it? If this situation wasn't so sad it would be funny.
D. Spiteri
Jul 24th 2009, 15:04
Well done Kurt Sansone for naming the members of the DCC board. It is incredible that the members cannot be investigated because they resigned from their post. It is tantamount to saying that one who commits a crime in a country and then leaves that country, cannot be charged for the offence. This loophole is too, too convenient.
The MEPA Auditor deserves the country's highest honour. Where would we be without individuals like him? Thanks also go to environmental NGOs like the Ramblers, who highlighted the Bahrija case and organized a peaceful protest that put the case in the public domain.
r ferriggi
Jul 24th 2009, 14:58
the members ( Ex members actually) of that time should be checked out properly.
something somewhere will show.
E. Azzopardi
Jul 24th 2009, 13:15
It the board is found guilty then the only way is for them to pay for their mistakes. The man in the streets pays for his mistakes. It is not use running away and resigning IF one is guilty. It will catch up with you. At least this is the impression and many are getting from all these reports.
Anthony Schembri Adami
Jul 24th 2009, 13:14
It only stands to reason that if an authority grants a permission ILLEGALLY and 'ultra vires' that same permission should be withdrawn (sorry Dr Scerri but it is only logical)
Mark Galea
Jul 24th 2009, 12:57
Thanks to Times of Malta for the names of the persons on the board.
On last thing, if anybody knows ... what is the current employment of the persons above WITH the government. Were they "rewarded" for their services?
Reno Spiteri
Jul 24th 2009, 12:27
The "culture of resignations" and the "culture of accountabilty" are non existent in Malta.
The fact that Victor Scerri resigned from his position of President of the PN which position he seems to have held for the last ten years came about because and only because his position became untenable. It also seems that nine years ago when the first permit was applied for he was already in this position. I wonder why and how Alfred Sant had missed this fact when he brought the JPO Mistra case to bear on the last election. Possibly because the permit was applied for under Said and not under Scerri. Come on guys please, give us a break.
Professional persons appointed to paid positions on national boards are, or should be, held totally accountable for their actions even after they die let alone after they resign or are replaced as in the case of the MEPA DCC Boards, and in the same way as action is being taken in the Mistra case.
MEPA has lost its credibility a long time ago, and a clean sweep of all illegally or controversially issued permits should be done by withdrawing them all now.
victor borg
Jul 24th 2009, 12:12
That's nice, now when somebody resigns from my company, he cannot be held responsible for any horrible mistake or bad decision he made, simply because he resigned.
Funny this only applies if this is a government appointed board or other. The rest will have the complete book thrown at them. Seems what's sauce for the goose in never for the gander.
Joe Agius
Jul 24th 2009, 11:41
Thanks to Kurt Sansone’s interest we now have the names we have been longing to hear. They too are public figures and should be up to public scrutiny. Good work Kurt; keep it up.
J. Borg
Jul 24th 2009, 10:48
The DCC Board and/or those who appointed them should be held personally liable for damages.
Anything short of this, will only fuel more of the same!
Joe Azzopardi
Jul 24th 2009, 10:38
Finally a name can be put to the persons making up the till now abstract DCC board. Apart from the damage done to personal reputations, MEPA Boards integrity, but most of all to the site in question, all this issue is a great thing for the country. It proves that:
Citizens (including those defined by some as “mob”) do care for the environment.
The audit system within MEPA can effectively function (well done to Joe Falzon).
Our NGOs have a fundamental role to play in society, and they make a very good job out of it.
The media have an indispensable role in bringing such cases to the public's attention.
Finally I must say that I find all the clamoring for resignations that usually follows such issues slightly pathetic. Dr Scerris' position was unattainable and it was his duty to resign. I also feel that had he failed to do so Dr Gonzi should have requested him to. Now is the time for the PM to take a firm stand and make sure that the good work carried out by his government does not keep constantly being overshadowed by the abuses of the greedy few.
J Oatmon
Jul 24th 2009, 10:24
I cannot beleive this following statement, surely these guys don't get away with their actions, just because they resigned?
"The auditor said that no action could be taken against the DCC board members who approved the Baħrija permit because they had since been replaced."
Only in Malta?
Vivienne Grech
Jul 24th 2009, 10:22
Fenech Adami is very much responsible for completely ignoring the environment during his 15-year long incumbency, Sant is responsible for not offering an environmental opposition, and Gonzi is responsible for continuing in his predecessor's shoes: letting market forces have their way while completely failing to protect areas that the market alone fails to regulate, like the environment and our aesthetic heritage.