Church asks whether PA has also 'succumbed to pro-business at all cost bug’

The Church Environment Commission said it is as baffled as other citizens by the Planning Authority’s decision to approve the mega project at St George’s bay

The project being proposed by the DB Group was granted a permit last week despite the PA receiving over 4,000 objections
The project being proposed by the DB Group was granted a permit last week despite the PA receiving over 4,000 objections

The Church Environment Commission has questioned the Planning Authority’s decision to grant a permit to the extensive project proposed by the DB Group at St George’s Bay.

The commission said it was “baffled” by the decision which it had also formally objected to.

“How can the PA reconcile its decision with its stated mission of ‘acting on behalf of the community to provide a balanced and sustainable environment’, when one considers the thousands of objections levelled against this development that were disregarded,” the commission said.

It added that the objections included many from people from surrounding localities who would be directly impacted by the development.

“What underlying reason could there be that would justify the brushing aside of these objections? In whose interest is the PA functioning? Such a decision surely rules out the interest of the surrounding communities,” it said.

Secondly, the commission also questioned how the PA could refute opportunities to force development proposals to be decided within a framework of a master plan.

“How can a planning authority reconcile its preference for sporadic mega-projects that continue to wreak havoc on communities in lieu of masterplans or local plans,” it said, emphasizing the planning in Planning Authority.

“Such plans would, if drawn up with communities’ wellbeing in mind, contribute to ensuring a sustainable management of our limited space and demonstrate the PA’s commitment to implementing its mission, i.e. to endeavor to provide a better quality of life for the community through transparent and fair planning services today and tomorrow,” the commission said.  

Moreover, the commission said that “repeated inconsistencies in its decisions” were not helping the authority make of Malta and Gozo a more pleasant and desirable place.

“Has the PA succumbed to the pro-business at all cost bug as well? If that is the case, and the PA is proving to be another toothless watchdog (as the former MEPA), which authority would have the guts to challenge the current business model and promote a pro-community strategy for development.

Finally, it said that when construction threatened the wellbeing of citizens decisions should not be tainted by petty partisan politics.

“It is indeed ironic that while the Planning Authority disregarded completely the justified concerns of communities affected by the proposed DB Group project, it is now organizing a conference in the first week of October with the title Planning for Liveable Places,” it said.

It said that while the conference intends to discuss the need to create the right social, economic and environmental conditions for liveable places, the reailty appeared to be that communities have no say at all on what happens in their own liveable spaces.

The commission said it feared that Malta was heading towards a planning system which does not even give lip service to the needs of communities, let alone to improve their liveable place.