Church board says key Mepa issues not tackled

The Church Environment Commission yesterday welcomed the planning authority reform proposals but said a number of fundamental issues had not been sufficiently addressed.

The commission said that although it was "politically correct" that the government assumed leadership of planning and environmental policy, it did not agree with such a proposal.

While the government should provide general direction to the Malta Environment and Planning Authority in the light of national priorities and cross-ministerial initiatives, the actual development of planning policies and their implementation should not be entrusted to the government or to political entities, it said.

In 2006, it said it had opposed the extension of the develop-ment boundaries into outside development zones (ODZ) on the premise that the proposed changes would ultimately further deplete natural resources.

At the time, the commission was slammed for just criticising the policy without coming up with tangible proposals.

Just less than three years later, the reform document admitted the exercise had led to about 2,160 applications eating up another chunk of limited land resources on the island.

The commission said it supported the initiative on development applications in ODZ areas even though "a lot of irreparable damage has already been done".

"The commission agrees with the proposed guidelines only if they will serve to significantly limit the rampant development frenzy in ODZs. If these proposed guidelines will loosely define 'urban compatible' developments giving space for ad hoc interpretations based on the discretion of political policymakers, then God help us!" it said.

The commission said it agreed with the proposal to include a civil society representative and a cultural heritage expert on the Mepa board, although one representative for civil society "might be considered as tokenism rather than true empowerment".

It supported the idea that all members of the board and the Development Control Commissions were to be subjected to scrutiny and endorsement by a parliamentary committee.

It also agreed with most of the proposals streamlining the development application process and third parties' participation in the appeal process.

The Church commission said appointing people to serve on the various boards being proposed had to be coupled with mechanisms that promoted accountability for actions and decisions taken.

"The reform document states the government intends to invest in Mepa's environmental arm. That intention is good enough. It will be even better if it is translated into practice," it said.

The commission said it fully supported proposals for the migration of the current audit office within Mepa to the Ombudsman's Office.

With regard to enforcement, the commission said it agreed with the proposal to set up an enforcement directorate but said it would have preferred an independent Environmental Protection Authority with its own enforcement capabilities.

It suggested the introduction of an anonymous reporting system and onsite monitoring inspections, particularly when permits were issued, to ensure conditions were adhered to and development briefs remained unchanged.

It favourably acknowledged the reform process and saw in it the potential to rectify wrongs and safeguard the island's sustainable development, provided the commitment from the government and citizens was maintained.

The Malta Chamber of Planners said it agreed with the general thrust of the document that politicians should provide policy direction.

It said it was shocked to realise the proposed changes to the current regime, such as policy formulation, zero tolerance and non-consideration of precedents were not sufficiently explained, leading to misinterpretations and weakening the message the document sought to convey.

It was also disappointed to note the document lacked an exhaustive appraisal of the benefits and cost of both financial and human resources and it concluded that the partial implementation of the reform could be disastrous as the exisiting operational costs could be overburdened.