The Planning Authority’s rejection of an application to turn a disused Swieqi farm into a residence has rekindled doubts over a permit approved in Siġġiewi for the daughter of a government consultant.
Last week, the PA board unanimously rejected an application for a villa in an ODZ area overlooking Swieqi valley. During the hearing, the Opposition’s representative, Ryan Callus, who also voted against the permit, said the authority was adopting a “two weights, two measures” approach.
He said board members who had argued that an affidavit was not enough to grant a permit in the Swieqi case, had actively defended the granting of a permit for an extensive villa in ODZ land in Siġġiewi, which was based on a questionable affidavit.
“When I heard the same board members last Thursday speaking against the affidavit as the only proof of former land use, after having fought tooth and nail in a previous application just a few weeks back (Siġġiewi case) to the contrary, I was flabbergasted. I cannot accept such blatantly unfair treatment,” he added.
The permit in Siġġiewi was issued in the name of Roderick Agius, the son-in-law of Albert (known as Bertu) Pace, the consultant of Agriculture Parliamentary Secretary Roderick Galdes.
The permit was initially granted but then reconsidered after this newspaper flagged suspicions surrounding the approval of the villa on 280 square metres of agricultural land. The newspaper report prompted an investigation.
The permit had relied on a letter signed by Stephen Galea as a Vet Support Officer at the agriculture department stating the site had once been a farm. This allowed the permit to go through under the provisions of the rural policy.
He is listed in government records as a labourer, not a Vet Support Office.
The letter had to be withdrawn following the investigation which concluded it was signed by an unauthorised officer and included statements that could not be verified, sources confirmed. Yet the PA still allowed Mr Galea to testify before the board as evidence.
Repeated requests for a copy of the report have been refused by the ministry. A Freedom of Information request as well as another request made under the Aarhus Convention were all rejected.
Sources informed this newspaper the investigation concluded that Mr Pace exerted undue pressure on public officers, affecting their ability to assess the case on the basis of its own merits. Yet the Planning Authority still approved the permit. Mr Pace remains the Parliamentary Secretary’s consultant.
“When the PA treats applicants differently it is doing a disservice to equality in planning, which it has a duty to prevent. It is an injustice,” Mr Callus said.
“My voting was consistent in the Siġġiewi and Swieqi cases. So we have to ask: Why was the Siġġiewi application treated differently? This is proof the PA has become politically motivated,” he charged.
In the Swieqi case, the application was refused over doubts about the architect’s assertion that the farmhouse had once been used as a dwelling, among other reasons.
A PA spokeswoman defended the authority’s decisions saying that in the Siġġiewi case Mr Galea’s version was supported by another Assistant Veterinary Support officer – no name was provided.
In the Swieqi case, there were a number of other reasons for the permit to be refused, including the excessive extension of the building. Different policies also guided the decision, the PA said.
“However, an affidavit is considered as good evidence depending on the case, and it is acceptable in conjunction with other documentation,” the spokeswoman added.
Reacting, Mr Callus said this confirmed an affidavit was not enough and therefore the Siġġiewi permit was clearly questionable. He insisted the permit was issued on the strength of the affidavit alone.
“Rules should not depend on the case and who submits the application,” he insisted.