Claim of cover-ups at planning authority

Opposition spokesman for the environment, Leo Brincat told Parliament yesterday that Falzon Waste Oils Co. Ltd, in the past, had former Prime Minister and President Emeritus Eddie Fenech Adami as their main protector while today the same could be said for Minister Tonio Fenech.

Speaking during the Malta Environment and Planning Authority Estimates 2011, Mr Brincat said that, while Falzon Waste Oils Co. Ltd was obliged to conduct monitoring studies, these were still not undertaken. Meanwhile, MOBC was supposed to make installations to the Vapour Recovery Unit of all tanks on-site and yet Mepa was expecting more submissions.

Moreover, while the Marsa power station was supposed to have a tank farm to reduce emissions by using Odour Scavenging Agents, Mepa had found that these measures were not adequate and was awaiting Enemalta to take abatement measures.

Mr Brincat argued that, on paper, Mepa seemed to strengthen its enforcement actions. However, there were several telephone calls in the last weeks to stop certain enforcements.

The Mepa reform did not tackle the accountability within Mepa. The principle of “money walks, money talks” was still supreme.

Earlier, Mr Brincat said the Environment and Planning directorates within Mepa should be two separate arms on the same level playing field. The government brought several excuses not to accept the opposition’s suggestion to set up a Parliamentary Committee to scrutinise Mepa to ensure that policies were respected.

While the opposition had also suggested the introduction of Spatial Planning, it seemed that the government did not really have such issue at heart.

Bureaucracy within Mepa had increased and processing fell behind while prospects of corruption increased as well. Transparency International had already identified the issuing of development permits in Malta as one of the most sectors characterised with corruption.

Certain Mepa employees had started operating in the development sector and were in conflict with the interests of their profession.

The cause of the Mepa reform failure was the arbitrary increases of the Mepa tariffs. It became more government-dependent rather than self-sufficient and self-financed. With the new tariffs, development applications had decreased and Mepa was earning less.

On environmental health, Mr Brincat argued that Parliamentary Secretary Mario de Marco tried to repair the damage that was the result of previous ministries, in­cluding the Prime Minister’s, such as the case with the Menqa at Marsa. While he identified the sym­­ptoms of the problem, there was no guarantee that the proposed remedies would be effective.

Experts had argued that the scientific reports on the environment near Hexagon House aimed to cover reality and to return employees to their place of work. Mepa tried to influence technical experts on smells and medical specialists when examining staff. While Mepa was supposed to protect the environment, it was not even protecting its employees’ health.

Mr Brincat said there were 1,130 less validated applications when compared to last year. The average of applications of the last quarter of 2010 was 300 less a month when compared to first two quarters of that same year. Moreover, decisions taken by the Environment Planning Commission in 2010 was around 80 applications less from the DCC in the second quarter of last year. This meant that the introduction of full-time board members did not improve efficiency in decision-making.

There was no balance between people working in the planning and environment directorates. Those who believed that there was a cultural change within Mepa were mistaken.

It had also increased its fees on packaging waste primarily to help an almost bankrupt company, Green MT, which belonged to the GRTU.

In certain cases Mepa took too long to issue an IPPC permit. But it did not take any action when Finance Minister Tonio Fenech promised that the extension of the Delimara power station would operate in May, even though the necessary permits were not yet issued.

The government was being dishonest and put Dr de Marco at the front, since he had a good image, to cover a monster.

It was shocking to discover that the former and present chairmen argued that “common sense was a luxury Mepa could not afford” and that “Mepa policies were only guidelines”.

Mr Brincat argued that the Prime Minister was to shoulder the responsibility for Mepa’s shortcomings and abuses, which also ended up before the European Commission.