A combative Marlene Farrugia had some sharp words for her Labour colleague Deborah Schembri during a parliamentary committee meeting yesterday.
It all started when Dr Schembri objected to new proposals being submitted by NGOs Din l-Art Helwa and Friends of the Earth on the Strategic Plan for Environment and Development (SPED).
Speaking during a meeting of the House Committee on the Environment and Planning Development, Dr Schembri maintained that the public consultation period on the document had been extended and these NGOs had still not made their proposals.
This was creating an “ugly precedent” because the rule of law must be abided by.
Dr Farrugia immediately countered that it was “a beautiful precedent”. What had happened was a clear lack of consultation with NGOs, who had not been heard, but she was determined that the committee she chaired should widen democracy.
The NGOs had returned to strengthen the country’s most important environmental document. If she saw a deficiency in her party, she wanted to see it changed
The NGOs had returned to strengthen the most important environmental document that the country stood to have. If she saw a deficiency in her party she wanted to see it changed.
“I suggest you do the same on your committee,” Dr Farrugia told Dr Schembri pointedly.
Petra Caruana Dingli of Din l-Art Ħelwa said repeatedly that it was not that the NGOs had not made their proposals during the period of public consultation but that they had been ignored. The present draft of the document was practically the same as before the public consultation.
Marthese Portelli (PN) said she considered that trying again was a great initiative on the part of NGOs.
Planning Parliamentary Secretary Michael Falzon said there had been ample time for consultation, which had also been extended. Some quarters had not come forward but today new submissions were being made.
A lot had been said about the structure plan, he added. The Opposition’s representative on the Mepa board, Ryan Callus, could tell how they had worked together and drawn up six policies to close six loopholes in one year, and were now working on six others.
Environment Minister Leo Brincat said the Structure Plan had been drawn up in a complete policy vacuum. Besides EU policies, Malta had its own environmental regulations and policy coordination.
Charles Buhagiar (PL) said he could not understand why it had taken from 1999 to the present to revise the Structure Plan. SPED was a strategic document which was very different from the Structure Plan.
Dr Falzon said SPED would be overriding and local plans would have to abide by it. He likened SPED to the Constitution and local plans to legislation.
Ms Caruana Dingli said the document held that national projects could outweigh other considerations. This was a big loophole that was anything but watertight, and more emphasis was needed on the environment.
Dr Portelli said all agreed that development in rural areas should be the last resort. But was this how things would be interpreted, or would the wording be circumvented?