Developers were paying for the planning authority to “collect lizards”, the president of the newly-formed Malta Developers Association Michael Falzon, said yesterday.
The former Nationalist minister criticised the recently hiked tariffs for development applications when he was interviewed by journalist Vanessa Macdonald at the Intercontinental Hotel, in Paceville, yesterday.
He said developers were happy to pay for the costs of processing applications but they should not subsidise the other costs of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority. Mr Falzon said he never agreed Mepa should be twinned with environmental duties, such as air monitoring and collecting lizards.
“And who is auditing Mepa to make sure they are not processing applications inefficiently,” he asked.
Mr Falzon said times were becoming hard for developers who were seen by the government as “an interesting cash cow”. Meanwhile, Mepa was operating with a “siege-mentality”, treating anyone who applied for developments as the enemy.
“The (Mepa) reform is giving rise to excessive unnecessary bureaucracy,” he said, pointing out that applicants now had to go into undue detail in their applications just so they could be accepted.
Conceding the recent rise in excise duty on cement was a minor issue, he said other increases in costs were resulting in difficulties for developers and lack of work for builders and contractors. He described the situation as a “recession” in development.
Mr Falzon complained about the fact that developers were often seen as “the bad guys”, adding the word “speculation” was often abused. Comparing developers to jewellers (as opposed to collectors of gold), he said most property was being developed, not speculated upon.
He acknowledged that some developers were taking excessive risks and bad decisions, ending up in serious debt. But others were victims of an inconsistent Mepa, which had begun taking “emotional” decisions and reverting outline permits that were originally granted.
Lambasting the Mepa reform, he said developers were not given their due importance and, instead, the government chose to get advice from Mepa. “If you have a problem with health consultants you don’t ask them how to solve it,” he said.
Asked if developers were putting their greed before aesthetics, Mr Falzon said: “Greed is a common vice. Developers do not have a monopoly on greed.”
However, he added Mepa was also to blame for bad aesthetics and architects were often asked to change designs for the worse because of people “obsessed” with urban conservation areas.
The stock of unsold properties was not “as big” as often perceived because there was a difference between the number of permits issued and those developed, he said. However, he augured the current over-supply of properties would hopefully push developers into giving their properties an “edge” over competitors by focusing on better design.
Mr Falzon said the association would publish a code of ethics by the end of the year and developers who breach it would be made to publicly say they did not form part of the association anymore.
Asked why taxpayers should subsidise developers, Mr Falzon said no such requests had been made by the MDA.
After the interview, a heated debate ensued with spokesmen from Mepa, NGO Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar, architects and developers. One passionate developer asked why developers should not have the right to collect property the way car dealers collect cars.