The Paceville master plan in its current state was a "no-go" and it would be used as a first draft with feedback from the general public and parliamentary committee taken into consideration, Planning parliamentary secretary Deborah Schembri said this evening.

Heated arguments between the parliamentary secretary and shadow minister Marthese Portelli dominated much of this evening’s Environmental and Development Planning Committee’s on the master plan.

Deborah Schembri.

Dr Portelli complained that the committee was being asked to rise and report to the Plenary when the Planning Authority and Lands Department had still not provided information requested by the Opposition.

This information included the means by which Gross Floor Area (GFA) allowances were assigned to developments, accurate charts showing which land was owned by the government and which land was privately owned, and the means by which compensation for expropriation would be calculated.

Dr Portelli refused to answer several questions posed by committee chair Franco Mercieca (PL) on the ground that the “yes” or “no” answers he requested did not allow for the presentation of nuanced positions, and could be used to undermine the Opposition’s arguments in the future.

Opposition MP Ryan Callus expressed his disappointment at the fact that Dr Mercieca’s questions had not been circulated to committee members before the meeting – questions which he said seemed to have been targeted mainly at the Opposition, and which did not seem to originate from Dr Mercieca himself.

Dr Portelli said that, rather than respecting the principle of “spatial planning” provided for in the Strategic Plan for the Environment and Development, or providing a holistic solution for Paceville, the plan was focused around accommodating the nine proposed sites identified to Mott MacDonald, who had been compromised by revelations of a conflict of interest.

In response, Dr Schembri said that the government wanted to create a workable plan, and addressing the needs of developers by accommodating existent projects was part of that.

Throughout the meeting, Dr Schembri pressed Dr Portelli and other Opposition MPs for specific objections to the plan’s content. Refusing to indicate specific sites or aspects of the plan that the Opposition found objectionable, except for the brief mention of Mercury House, Dr Portelli kept insisting that the master plan as a whole should be scrapped and sent “back to the drawing board”.