A change for the worse

Planning laws are not sexy matters.  Few common mortals would spend the summer days reading through and in between the lines of three vulomnious laws which would determine the future of our environment.  Yet the issue at stake is fundamental.  It is  all about how much power we are willing to give to Ministers in planning decisions.  For ultimately this is not just about splitting MEPA in two authorities, one for the environment and one for planning but mostly about strengthening the hand of the Minister in the planning process.

Instead of strengthening autonomy of our planning system and parliamentary scrutiny, the law as proposed strengthens the hand of government.

The new law regulating our planning system is nothing but a missed opportunity to strengthen the autonomy and integrity of  our planning system.

Unfortunately environmental NGOs are faced with an exercise in tweaking existing laws to further strengthen the hand of government in planning decisions  instead of an exercise in making current structures more accountable.

For example the law states that “any person who is served with an enforcement notice” in respect of development which may be regularised “by virtue of regulations made by the Minister”, shall have the right to request the new Planning Authority (PA) to regularise the development.  This can pave the way to a planning amnesty through a legal notice.  This is because  the new law will give the minister responsible for the PA blanket powers to define both the illegalities which can be sanctioned, and the fines which would be applicable.

Instead of tweaking existing laws which already give government too much power in planning matters the new law could have been an opportunity to restore parliamentary sovereignity over planning.

One way of doing this is by ensuring that all key appointments like that of members of the planning board, members of the Environment and Planning Review Tribubal and that of Chief Executive Office are made by the President on advise of the Prime Minister following a grilling session in parliament’s standing committee on planning. 

One danger of the new law is that it may serve to boost the power of the Executive Chairman whose position is entirely dependent on the Minister. The law states that the Executive Chairperson may be dismissed by the Minister at any time for “a just cause and it shall be a just cause if the Minister determines that he has not achieved the targets and objectives set for him by the Minister”.  This clearly undermines any autonomy the Executive Chairperson may have. It might make much more sense to make the Executive Chairperson directly accountable to parliament instead of towards the Minister.

Another risk of the new set up is that all members of the Planning Authority’s Executive committee-which is in charge of the day to day running of the organisation and policies -will be government appointees.  While today the NGO representative and the opposition are represented in the Authority’s sole board, they will now be only be represented on the Planning Board which issues permits. This means that there will be less and not more scrutiny of the authority’s internal operations.

It would have made much more sense to increase transperancy and openness by for example ensuring that all meetings of the Executive Committee are held in public and streamed on-line and that minutes of its meetings are published.

The only way to defeat the perception that the Planning Authority is there to serve the people and not vested interests is to make it as transparent as possible. Unfortunately the new law is a throwback to the times when planning decisions were taken directly by Ministers and their cronies.  One may well say that this was also the case through more indirect mechanisms under the previous administration.  But clearly people have voted in the new administration to change things for the better not the worse.  This is a clear case of a change for the worse.