History showed that the gateway leading to corruption was opened when politicians took upon themselves the decision of whether land could be developed, Opposition leader Simon Busuttil said in Parliament last night.

“Let us correct the shortcomings of the current planning regime, rather than turn them into sacrilege,” he said.

As the House, for a second day, debated the establishment of the Executive Council of the new Development Planning Authority, the Opposition continued to heavily criticise the way the council would be composed and its members selected. Under the Bill, the minister will exercise discretion over the appointment and removal of the members.

Calling these provisions “a huge step backwards”, Dr Busuttil said they would simply concentrate power into the minister’s hands.

Parliamentary Secretary Michael Falzon reiterated that the “innovative” approach sought to bring about a paradigm shift within the current development planning regime, by separating the policy setting-arm from the decision-making process.

The problem with this country is that planning started late

Ryan Callus (PN) underlined that the Opposition was not speaking against the Mepa demerger since this was part of Labour’s electoral mandate. But the Opposition, he said, wanted to contribute towards increased environmental accountability and transparency.

Its proposals to include environmental NGOs’ nominees on the Executive Council and the parliamentary scrutiny mechanism were moves in this direction.

Deborah Schembri (PL) said the government was moving an amendment to the Bill to enhance the council’s independence by providing for security of tenure to its members. However, she disagreed with the Opposition’s proposal that environmental NGOs’ nominees should sit on the council, with the government instead proposing they have observer status.

The relationship between the Executive Council and Parliament was extensively debated. Marthese Portelli (PN) proposed the remodelling of Parliament’s Environment and Planning Committee along the lines of the Public Accounts Committee, as promised in the government’s electoral manifesto.

This would entail that the number of members rise to seven. While the government would hold the majority, the Opposition would nominate the chairperson.

The parliamentary committee would also hold a public hearing of the person nominated as the Development Planning Authority’s executive chairperson.

Such a move would also be in line with the electoral manifesto’s commitments.

The interaction between Parliament and council in policy development and formulation was also debated. George Pullicino (PN) asked how the government was envisaging the parliamentary committee’s role in policy development.

He appealed for an improvement in the current situation, wherein the minister signed off a policy developed by experts and amended by the planning authority, to one where the final approval rested with the parliamentary committee.

“The problem with this country is that planning started late, after several great blunders were already committed. It is time to take this next quality leap,” Mr Pullicino said.

Dr Falzon replied that all policies would be subject to effective public consultation. He confirmed that the parliamentary committee would discuss all policies.

He also tabled an amendment to ensure that the Environment Protection Authority’s representatives attend all the meetings of the Executive Council except those unrelated to policy.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.