When people talk about the progressive loss of the countryside over the last 10 years following the ill-judged and uncalled for expansion of the development areas in 2006, they have in mind the plundering of outside development zone, or ODZ, land by successive governments for construction development.

The issue of ODZ land reached the height of public concern when the government announced it would allow a large stretch of open land and protected coastline in Żonqor Point, Marsascala, to be built upon as part of a private foreign-funded education project. ODZ and the degradation of the ever-decreasing countryside has since dominated the headlines as an issue of public concern.

It led directly to the establishment of a new coalition of environmental NGOs, Front Ħarsien ODZ, and the largest environmental street protest ever held in Malta a year ago. Public sentiment about protecting the countryside has been awakened as never before. Despite the Nationalist Party’s poor record on ODZ while in government, the leader of the Opposition has been quick to put his party’s weight behind the campaign to protect the countryside and, specifically, to control any further development ODZ.

He has declared the environment an electoral ‘game-changer’. He sees the adoption of a ‘green agenda’ as the pathway to the PN winning back lost votes that could propel it into power at the next general election.

“The government giving up ODZ land for speculative projects on the grounds that it is cheap, if not freely available, should be a thing of the past,” hehas said.

With this in mind, he recently announced the findings of a partial review of the party’s environmental policy. The centre-piece of his review concerned ODZ and his declaration that to ensure it is adequately protected any such land should in future require approval by a two-thirds majority in Parliament. He took as his model for the ODZ vote the system already in place for the nomination of the President.

The leader of the Opposition is absolutely right to focus on the ODZ issue. However, the crux is whether his proposal will prove workable in practice. Under the system for electing the President, nominations are put to a vote requiring two-thirds majority in the House but if no consensus is reached following two votes, a decision is taken based on a simple majority.

The latter has almost invariably been the upshot of this process and, given the polarised nature of our politics, seems unlikely to be any different when it comes to an ODZ vote, thus not really taking matters any further forward, even if the level of scrutiny is raised substantially.

More pertinently, is the Opposition leader’s proposal only to be confined to “major projects of national importance” however defined? What about all the myriad applications involving ODZ structures, which by their insidious, creeping encroachment on the countryside also cause huge damage to it? Are these to continue to be dealt with separately under the current flawed planning process, which has so obviously failed to protect ODZ today?

So, while the Opposition leader’s proposal has its valid points, what needs to be ensured is that planning laws are sufficiently tightly drawn to avoid the need to go to Parliament each time a project involving ODZ land comes up for consideration. The only way to ensure ODZ is safeguarded is for ministers to exercise the political resolve not to plunder the countryside by adhering strictly to the planning laws they enacted.

The Prime Minister is wrong if he thinks ODZ development becomes acceptable just because he and the Opposition leader deem it so.