San Blas: Conflicts of interest and mistaken identities

An iron gate and a metal frame have raised questions about the credibility of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA) where environmental abuse is concerned.

On Monday MEPA issued an enforcement order against the gate and metal frame which were assembled in a field at San Blas, one of the most pristine beaches in Gozo.

The owner, Joseph Portelli, claims he had no intention of developing a kiosk and that all he wanted was a canopy for his own personal use, as several camps have which are set up around the area.

But what raised public interest in this case was the realisation that even one of the most secluded locations in Malta is not immune from development. The other issue is that action was taken only following reports on the media.

Environmental NGO Flimkien Ghall-Ambjent Ahjar claimed in a statement that a report was lodged on June 18 and that MEPA took decisive action only after reports appeared in the media.

If this is so, the case raises questions about the effectiveness of the authority in dealing with cases of abuse in scheduled areas. This contrasts with declarations made by MEPA officials that they intend strengthening enforcement in Outside Development Zone (ODZ) areas.

If no report was lodged, as MEPA is saying, the case still underscores the importance of adequate monitoring of scheduled areas, but this would require a strengthening a MEPA’s resources.

It is worth recalling that MEPA clamped down on sizeable development in Golden Bay (a scheduled site) only this year, years after the development was made.

A tale of two CEOs

What made the case sensational was the alleged involvement of MEPA’s CEO, Johann Buttigieg, and the confirmed presence of his predecessor, former CEO Ian Stafrace, at San Blas, which probably led to confusion about the two. Probably it was Stafrace and not Buttigieg who was seen on the scene.

In fact Johann Buttigieg immediately denied a report in The Malta Independent claiming that he was seen at the bay with a Gozitan entrepreneur overseeing works on a cleared site in San Blas.

Of more serious concern are the alleged business links between Buttigieg’s spouse and a property developer with connections with the Gozitan entrepreneur, Joseph Portelli.

Creditinfo lists Lorraine Buttigieg as a shareholder in MMB Limited and as a company secretary in two struck-off property development companies, namely Ta’ Pinu Developments Limited and Zebbiegh Developments Limited.

“The companies mentioned by The Malta Independent were closed down three years ago,” Buttigieg said, adding that he and his wife had done away with any business interests due to his appointment at MEPA.

While in a small country like Malta such business links are bound to surface, this case highlights the importance of full public disclosure by MEPA’s senior officials of any present or past financial interests which may result in potential embarrassment for the authority. 

It is also worth noting that before his appointment as CEO, Buttigieg served as a case officer and then as a senior planning officer assigned to major projects - a sensitive role where he was scrutinising plans which had a bearing on applications presented by both government and private developers.

The code of ethics approved in 2008 clearly explains the conflict of interest faced by MEPA employees.

MEPA employees and appointees “may own or have interests in property that may be affected by planning and land management decisions”. This creates a “real potential for conflict of interest”.

According to the code of ethics MEPA employees are expected to declare their financial interests, including the interest of spouses and children.  Perhaps it may be useful if the declarations made by senior officials like board members and the CEO are also published.

It may even make sense to subject officials to the grilling of parliament’s committee on development and planning. 

Moreover it underscores the importance of a transparent selection process. While Ian Stafrace was chosen by direct appointment, Buttigieg was chosen after an internal call but only after being identified as former parliamentary secretary Michael Farrugia’s reference point in MEPA.

MaltaToday has also revealed that Stafrace and Joseph Portelli were at the bay at the same time on Sunday of last week, raising the suspicion of a case of mistaken identity where the present CEO was mistaken for the former CEO.

Stafrace confirmed he knew that Portelli had bought the land in question but never discussed any business plans.

Portelli confirmed he often sought advice from Stafrace on other matters  after the latter resigned from MEPA.

“I started using his services after he left MEPA,” Portelli said.

On its own this declaration raises questions about revolving doors; i.e. the movement of personnel between roles as legislators and regulators and the industries affected by the legislation and regulations.

While Stafrace is doing nothing illegal, as the authority’s former legal advisor and its former CEO, he may be party to insider knowledge. 

In the past there have been cases of MEPA officials who served as consultants or architects of developers after leaving MEPA. 

A code of ethics for MEPA employees issued in 2008 states that former employees should not be involved in any application or planning issue in which they were previously involved as MEPA officers. Nor are they allowed to divulge to third parties, nor make any use of confidential

information to which they were previously privy during their MEPA employment. But other countries go further than this,

The French penal code governing public officials who move between the public and private sectors requires a three-year wait between working in the government and taking a job in the private sector.

Ban on sanctioning

The Tal-Blas case also raises questions about the government’s intention to remove the blanket ban on sanctioning illegalities in scheduled zones introduced in 2010.

Irrespective of his intentions, Portelli cannot apply to regularise any illegal development on this site because MEPA can no longer sanction any development on scheduled sites like San Blas. 

But if the law is changed in the way proposed by the government he would still have the opportunity to apply to regularise the works undertaken in the past weeks.

Scheduled sites include historical buildings or sites which enjoy various degrees of protection because of scientific or natural importance.

Article 70 of the Environment and Development Planning Act enacted by the previous government in December 2010 prohibits MEPA from regularising any illegal developments in any scheduled property.

The sixth schedule of the Environment and Development Planning Act also bans MEPA from regularising any illegal extension to ODZ development if this was carried out after 2008.

But the consultation document “For an efficient planning system” now proposes the deletion of the sixth schedule, which will be replaced by the imposition of daily fines.

This does not mean that MEPA will automatically legalise these developments.  It only means that once again MEPA will be able to consider applications to regularise these developments. The risk is that owners of these sites will be given the impression that they can build now and sanction later. The greatest risk is that this will give owners, especially those making money from illegal lidos, beach restaurants or kiosks the chance to further delay MEPA enforcement actions.