MEPA split ‘regressive step’ that will appease construction lobby

Green Party says document on land planning has in mind the interest of developers while ignoring environmental needs. 

AD said the new MEPA document will only appease the developers' lobby.
AD said the new MEPA document will only appease the developers' lobby.

Malta Environment and Planning Authority into two separate arms, will be a “regressive” move for MEPA, the green party Alternattiva Demokratika said.

AD’s chairperson Arnold Cassola said that the new plan was intended at appeasing developers rather than safeguarding residents’ rights.

Reacting to the document ‘For an efficient planning system’, AD said this was a confirmation that there was no difference between the Labour government and the previous Nationalist administrations on environmental issues.

Cassola lambasted the fragmentation of environmental governance functions, underlining that it would have been much better had the environmental and land use planning section been retained under the same roof. 

“Their amalgamation in one authority twelve years ago was a step forward, but it should have been followed with allocation of additional resources needed in the environmental directorate,” Cassola said.

He noted that rights of residents could not be safeguarded enough in the past years due to the lack of resources.

AD deputy chairperson Carmel Cacopardo said that while the document focuses on an efficient planning system, it was diminishing the protection of outside-development zones (ODZ) and other protected areas. 

“Until now, changes to protected properties or development in such areas could not be sanctioned, but now this is possible to regularise for the sake of efficiency. This is a regressive step where the government is sending out the message that crime pays, since one day or another you may regularise your position,” Cacopardo said.

Cassola and Cacopardo, both candidates for the European Parliament, also hit out at the fact that the composition of planning boards are ignored in the document. They said that in contrast with the current composition, MPs should not have a direct say on planning permits. 

“Their role should be limited to supervision and investigation. They should scrutinise from parliamentary committees and monitor the authority from there,” Cacopardo added.