Sectoral interests, politics will hinder Mepa reform - AD

Alternattiva Demokratika believes the interests of the construction industry, combined with politics interfering with the decision-making process of building permits, will hinder the planning authority reform.

Reacting to the proposed Malta Environment and Planning Authority reform, Carmel

Cacopardo, AD spokesman for sustainable development, said the government proposals were "insignificant".

"Proposed legislation is substantially a consolidation of the existing laws with minor amendments," he said, adding that the proposed legislation failed to tackle two basic issues.

He criticised the fact that competence in environmental issues was not a criterion for the appointment of the authority's board members. AD considered this a must and the environment had to be upgraded to a separate authority. This was not a matter of principle but one of strategy as it was the only way to ensure enforcement of environmental responsibilities.

Mr Cacopardo said the government retained control over the nomination of the Mepa board and Development Control Commission members.

At present, the Mepa board and the three DCCs had a different chairman. The Mepa board delegated most of its decision-making powers in respect of development applications to the DCCs, so these had a crucial role to play in securing consistency. Decisions on large-scale applications were usually taken by the Mepa board itself.

To enhance consistency in decision-making, the government would be appointing two full-time chairmen to preside over the two full-time DCCs as part of the proposed reform. The chairmen would also automatically hold the position of deputy chairman on the Mepa board.

Mr Cacopardo said the government should share decision-making regarding who got nominated to the Mepa board and DCCs with Parliament. This should be done through a House Select Committee, which would hold public hearings with the intention of weeding out unsuitable nominees.

He added that legislation should be a tool for reform to happen. If it were flawed then reform was bound to be flawed.