‘Mepa reform bearing fruit’

The year-old Mepa reform has already started to filter down to applicants and bear fruit, Parliamentary Secretary Mario de Marco told Parliament yesterday.

Introducing the debate on the financial estimates of the planning authority, Dr de Marco said that this was borne by the fact that 60 unacceptable applications submitted by May had dwindled to 15 by November.

Contrary to past practice, applications were now being screened for clarity, with 3,547 resulting in just under 3,000 screening letters. Two per cent of applications were found to need no Mepa permit. Little more than one per cent needed minor amendments rather than a letter of refusal being issued.

The authority had refused 328 applications on points of principle, and 190 other applications had been stopped in their tracks. This meant savings of energy and costs to both Mepa and applicants.

Dr de Marco dwelt at great length on the workings of the various sectors of Mepa following the reform, showing how the service was now “more serious, more efficient and more transparent”. The compulsory submission of applications electronically had done a lot to increase efficiency and simultaneous work on each application.

Mepa needed to strike a balance between the environment and planning, but it also needed to shore up its revenues, particularly through €2 million worth of paid work for the government.

Enforcement was being more steadfastly done, and some cases had been referred to the courts. Daily fines and major fines had been increased substantially.

In order to contain the human impact on the environment, guidelines regarding quarry operations would be published to control dust pollution. Thirty-six of the 67 quarries had applied for environmental permits, and 56 quarries had been inspected this year.

Mepa had enhanced the procedures for filming permits.

Its first strategic plan for the protection of biodiversity would be unveiled shortly. Five zones had been proposed as marine protected areas.

Mepa had issued 25 environmental pro-jects for industrial purposes and was planning to approve 500 projects in the next years for better control of industrial emissions.

Dr de Marco stressed the importance of monitoring the state of the environment through compliance inspections. A €5 million project was under way to enhance the infrastructure vis-à-vis a number of sensitive issues.

The authority had commissioned experts to work on enforcing the EU Noise Directive, as well as neighbourhood noise which the directive did not address. A White Paper would be issued with regard to the latter.

One of the main outstanding problems was still waste management, and steps were being taken to update the national policy and ensure greater observance. The system of eco-contributions was being reviewed.

Opposition spokesman on Mepa Roderick Galdes said new applications had dropped from 5,000 last year to about 1,500. The authority’s borrowing at present amounted to €7.7 million and hence this would have to increase. The authority was far from being self-financed and self-sustainable.

The government had made a U-turn on its self-financing principle. It was to receive €3.5 million from government fees. This was an indirect form of subsidy.

He said that applications dropped heavily because of sharp increases in tariffs. This was affecting the construction sector where there was a slow down in activity and some employers were considering job cuts.

The reform, said Mr Galdes, failed because it only tackled procedures but did not change its policies. Mepa was inconsistent, with legal notices changed frequently. He said that efficiency had been achieved because the workload had been reduced due to fewer applications.

He said that Mepa had become so media sensitive that boards sometimes refused applications because of media pressure even though they were in line with the law.

Problems were created because different boards gave different interpretations of the same laws and legal notices. There was a lot of inconsistency in handling applications on the construction of villas.

The problem of obnoxious smells at Hexagon House, which he said had cost the government not less than €4.5 million, had not been fully solved. The ventilation system which had been installed was not functioning.

Mr Galdes said also that enforcement was weak with the strong but strong with the weak. A substantial number of cases of illegality resulted from government departments.

Winding up the debate, Dr de Marco said fees projected for this year were €6.5 million compared to last year’s €4.4 million, based not on incoming applications but on actual decisions.

Instead of charging higher fees the Environment Protection Directorate was doing 90 per cent of its work for the government. Mepa was also enhancing its revenue through the deployment of 50 land surveyors and its mapping units.

The directorate was now fuelled not by development but by conservation and regeneration.

Dr de Marco said it was not true that Mepa had become more efficient because it had less work, because more applications than ever were being decided. With 300 new applications for screening being received every month, the 1,600 pending applications were really work in progress, not backlog.

As to whom Mepa could please, it was a question of balance, but at least people now knew where they stood with the authority.