WATCH | Andre Callus: 'Planning reforms a devil’s pact between Abela and developers'

In his usual fashion, Moviment Graffitti’s Andre Callus minced no words when speaking about the government’s proposed planning reforms, which he described as a devil’s pact between developers and the Prime Minister. 

As we sit down in the NGO’s headquarters in Strada Stretta, Callus jokes that, like many activists, his summer plans were upended when Robert Abela sneakily gifted developers draft reforms that were described as a “developers’ wish list.  

He states that the grievous nature of the reforms leaves Graffitti with no choice but to call for their withdrawal. When asked why they were completely rejecting the reforms instead of seeking middle ground, Callus says that such “malice” cannot be fixed, adding that the consultation process that was launched was merely for show. 

The activist tells MaltaToday that he has no trust in Robert Abela to listen to their concerns. 

Callus explains that the fate of the environment and the planning sector in Malta is not dependent on a sham public consultation. Rather, it is decided by those who can make their voice heard loudest, whether it is the public or developers, whom he describes as the ones really pulling the strings despite never being elected to power. 

The following is an excerpt from the interview.  

Why is your call on government to retire these planning laws instead of finding middle ground? 

The sham consultation started after the draft laws were presented to parliament in July because people were so angry that fortunately, their anger stopped government from going through with these laws in the middle of summer.  

For two years, they [government] has been telling us that they’re working on a reform in the appeals process. We were begging them for a meeting to consult with us and they were basically mocking us. All of a sudden in July we find two draft laws presented to parliament that were going to strip away all the safeguards we have in the planning system.  

We described this as “a developers’ wish list.” We’ve looked at the law and we’ve seen how they’re trying to appease specific developers and projects without communities being able to do anything about it. When you see such malice, you can’t fix it… you can only make it less bad but still horrible… 

These laws are the result of a devil’s pact between the Prime Minister and developers represented by people like [Robert] Musumeci, Johann Buttigieg, who coincidentally was once again made CEO of the Planning Authority a few months prior. It’s clear that this pact was made at the top and was imposed on cabinet and is now being imposed on us.  

I assume you’ve had meetings with government on this issue. How is that going? Is government truly ready to listen to you? 

We were invited to the meetings and we attended but our position was clear that these [planning laws] cannot be fixed. Something that is structurally bad cannot be fixed.  

It’s difficult to know what they [government] are thinking. We’re not talking about technical dynamics or an analysis of what is good and wrong. We’re speaking about political dynamics; how strong developers will be and how strong the people will be. At the end of the day that’s what’s going to determine the outcome. 

Whether this coup by developers will win, or whether the people will put up a big enough fight to prevent them from steamrolling over us.  

I think I know that your answer is going to be based on what we’ve talked about so far. However, do you trust government and the prime minister to act in the best way? 

Absolutely not. In the last few years, we’ve seen communities, residents, and farmers being pushed aside to please a few people. One example is the local plan changes to the Villa Rosa site to please one developer. Tal-Franċiż proposed such a monstrous project that it goes beyond what the local plan allows. 

Instead of forcing him to change his project to conform with the local plan, they’re revising the local plan so that the project can go ahead.  

Local plans, laws, and decision-making processes are being stretched like chewing gum, changing according to the will of a few people with money who were never elected, yet are pulling the strings. 

Let’s talk about regularisation. Abela famously invoked examples of rooms in fields and illegal washrooms. There are undoubtedly genuine cases. Do you think this kind of regularisation is acceptable? 

According to the proposed reforms, there is no limit on the size, scope, or location of the illegalities that are to be regularised. When the prime minister mentions small rooms and washrooms, this doesn’t reflect the law. The legal notices they want can regularise every type of illegality, even in sensitive places.  

There’s no limit to the size of the illegality… 

When it comes to small rooms, we asked for studies to see how many such illegalities exist. When you’re doing something that’s going to have an impact, it’s going to change the designation of certain places. If an illegality is on ODZ land and you regularise a building on it, it’s no longer ODZ. We should first have a study to see the impact of such actions, not blurt out wide and limitless legal notices to regularise all illegalities that have taken place.  

Even the message this sends is, “Rules are for nothing.” 

You speak a lot about greed as the spirit of a lot of issues in Malta’s development sector. Is it just greed? There are many who inherent property and see it as an opportunity to make a good chunk of change. Isn’t this a more common factor than the greed of a few developers? 

We don’t believe that development shouldn’t exist. We understand that construction needs to happen but it should be done in a way which makes sense. We’re talking about a system where, instead of seeing the collective good, it is disproportionately skewed in favour of the interests of a small number of people who make big money from it. 

Along the years people have had opportunities to partner up with a developer, demolish a building and build a four plus one. I understand this. But people are seeing that our life on these islands is worsening. I understand that in every society there are different impulses like the impulses to make a good sum of money fast and that’s normal. But there are also stimuli that show us as a society that, the way things are going, it doesn’t look very good. And if these draft laws get enacted we’d be accelerating into a brick wall. 

You are among those who believe that the economic model needs to change. Maybe that’s true but, people’s standard of living has changed and it needs to be sustained. What should change here? 

… In Malta we’ve had economic growth. We make a distinction between a strong economy, which we don’t believe we have, and strong economic growth.  

What’s the difference? 

Economic activity is growing, but who’s benefitting from this? For us, a strong economy is one where everyone benefits. Now we have limitless economic growth that, in order to sustain this bonfire of growth, we’re burning the environment, workers’ rights, we’re keeping wages low, but what are we getting from it? 

Yes, there’s more money in circulation, but we’re seeing suffering as well, not only environmentally. A life of stress and mental health problems… 

What we want is a different economic model where the goal isn’t growth, but a just economy through, for instance, government intervention to raise wages, planning rules that are beneficial for everyone, a tax system where those who accumulate more get taxed more…