Nationalist back-bencher Charlò Bonnici told Parliament on Wednesday that the substantial increase in daily fines with regard to irregular development should serve as a strong deterrent for people not to abuse the system.
He said the reform of Mepa was an electoral promise which the Nationalist government was implementing. People were prejudiced against the authority because their applications vanished into thin air.
One of the most significant changes in the Bill was that DCC board members would hold office on a full-time basis. This would facilitate the process of determining applications and would make for greater transparency.
Mr Bonnici said that the Enforcement Directorate was another plus point of the Bill. Having restricted means, Mepa was seen as a non-effective authority because it could not act against developers who negatively affected others with their projects.
Admittedly, major projects like road construction created jobs and helped the economy, but in such cases an environmental impact assessment should always be carried out. The success of the Bill depended on the honesty and integrity of those who worked at Mepa.
The heritage agency would be split into the cultural and natural heritage, thus avoiding conflicting decisions.
There were also improvements in the way Mepa dealt with complaints by local councils.
Concluding, Mr Bonnici said that the Mepa reform could never be easy because there were many issues that were being tackled, but it aimed at having more transparency, effectiveness, efficiency and accountability.
Francis Zammit Dimech (PN) stated that it was crucial to have an autonomous process in planning and environment - a process that must not be tarnished by any political or governmental processes.
Those who criticise particular decisions lead one to understand that they do not want to have an independent and autonomous process. The process itself involves persons with conflicting views and this itself indicates a need for an independent process.
Dr Zammit Dimech said that although development was required as this favoured the economy, it needed to be sustainable. The Bill sought to strengthen protection for the environment following a wide consultation process through which the government tried to rope in the public's comments.
He praised the proposed reform as one through which the planning and environment process gained more semblance to a judicial process, providing clearer rules of operation and establishing time-limits within which the authority was to work.
He emphasised the importance of strengthening a better representation of independent persons within the authority, saying that these persons were appointed on the basis of their integrity and expertise and so providing a valid contribution.
Sanctioning of illegal developments in ODZs and the possibility of reconsideration were being removed. These were important principles in the reform. The appointment of an ombudsman on planning and environment within the Ombudsman structure was also praised as a positive development.
Dr Zammit Dimech appealed for consistency in the determination of the applications.
Stephen Spiteri (PN) said the government had had the courage to ensure that important sectors in Maltese society were reformed. This was the case with Mepa too.
Mepa should live on in the service of the people, efficiently, transparently and with less bureaucracy. There was huge tension between the environment and planning, especially because of the country's small size. Sustainable development meant economic, social and environmental decisions.
Eight years ago the government had amalgamated the environment with planning as the best way to regularise that tension in a single process. The policy of development must be drawn up with the environment firmly in mind. Criticism was sometimes understandable, especially by people who were not fully aware of what was happening at the authority.
If the environment was really allowed to suffer at the hands of development, as some feared, it would be the country to suffer most.
The proposed reform was built on experience, in the hope that the Maltese would become more aware of the environment as a top priority, just as it used to look at development some 30 years ago.
Very serious consideration should be taken if Mepa's decisions would in any way harm general health.