The Opposition yesterday moved two counter motions to the Strategic Plan for the Environment and Development, seeking to ensure the new legislation would be “truly strategic”.
In the first motion, the Opposition requested that the plan be sent back to Mepa to be redrafted from scratch after the necessary studies are conducted.
The Opposition presented a second motion saying that, if the first was defeated, any future amendments to SPED must be approved by Parliament.
At the start of the sitting, Opposition leader Simon Busuttil warned that the government was going to avail itself of the summer recess to implement changes it had proposed – which would weaken environmental protection – in order to honour its obligations.
The government wanted to make it easier for itself and its clique to abuse the environment at the expense of the people.
Labour’s cry of Malta Tagħna Lkoll (Malta belongs to all) was a lie and people now realised that Malta belonged to this government. Its promise to strengthen the voice of NGOs was also a lie. This government considered the environment as an obstacle to doing as it pleased.
After the Żonqor debacle, everyone felt the environment was being lost. Admitting that mistakes were committed in the past, Dr Busuttil said these, however, had not consisted of obscenities.
He noted that the Church’s Environmental Commission had described the Strategic Plan as “a far cry from the 1990 Structure Plan”, adding it would “take us 25 years back”.
Instead of improving the existing Structure Plan, the government had weakened it. It only had drafted a summarised document.
The government is riding roughshod over civil society
Three other Bills would weaken environmental protection instead of strengthening it, as they aimed to “dismantle” Mepa so the government could take absolute control of all matters.
After the demerger of Mepa, environmental protection would fall under the ministry of Leo Brincat, who was “the most ineffective minister”. The Prime Minister himself would retain responsibility for development planning.
“One can only imagine who would win between the two,” Dr Busuttil said.
This was why the Opposition had sent a letter to the chairperson of the Environment and Development Planning Committee, insisting the Bills should be discussed within the committee in the presence of civil society and to hold debates in Parliament afterwards.
The committee had met yesterday but there was no series of meetings planned. The government was riding roughshod over civil society. This was only a government of appearances and bluff. NGOs had been given less than 24 hours’ notice.
The demerger of Mepa was not a simple task that one could take lightly.
“What’s wrong with implementing the Bills at a later stage after public consultation,” he asked.
Following the demerger of Mepa, the environmental authority would be relegated to an external consultant. The government was centralising power and there would be more scandals.
The government’s real intention was to weaken environmental protection and to enjoy absolute control. This plan would pave the way for uncontrolled development and affect people’s quality of life.
The vote on the motions was postponed in view of the fact there were 31 government MPs present to only seven from the Opposition.