The Strategic Plan for Environment and Development (Sped) lacked a clear plan of action with informed policies, set deadlines and an indication of whoever would be responsible for its implementation, the church’s environment commission said.

In its reaction to the document this morning, it said the outlined policy failed to be an adequate replacement for the Structure Plan mainly because, apart from its shorter time frame, it failed to provide official statistical information justifying its policies and proposals.

It noted that, notwithstanding the extension of the period of consultation, there was no real attempt to motivate the public to participate.

The commission welcomed Sped’s attempt to address the social dimension in socio-economic development, and insisted yet again that the management of environmental resources and sustainable development should be officially undertaken by the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development.

The commission failed to see valid reasons justifying the “minor adjustments” to the development zone boundaries proposed by Sped, when the supply of dwelling units was much greater than the demand.

It said it failed to understand why Sped proposed no tangible and strict policies to control the unsustainability of local land development.

The commission agreed with the general principles of the national spatial strategy, but had strong reservations about the proviso allowing the government to bypass established policies.

It commended Sped for highlighting the link between health and the environment in issues related to development but noted that the document did not refer to the hazards caused by the fireworks industry.

The commission slammed the document for a statement referring to the urgency of commissioning specific studies relating to the issue, when local research on the health hazards related to fireworks residue was already available.

The commission urged the government to learn from past experiences and use Sped and any review of planning legislation to remove ambiguous and ill-advised regulations and policies that allowed individuals and organisations to profit from resultant loopholes.

It reiterated that, for transparency’s sake, the names of all those responsible in the compilation of such documents should be mentioned. The sensitivity of documents like Sped could not be underestimated since what was written in them would directly affect what happened on the ground.

The Sped, in its current version, fell short of guaranteeing a solid step in practising sustainable development at this level, the commission said.

Read the commission's reaction in full in the pdf link below.