Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1110343
18 maltatoday EXECUTIVE EDITOR Matthew Vella MANAGING EDITOR Saviour Balzan Letters to the Editor, MaltaToday, Vjal ir-Rihan, San Gwann SGN 9016 E-mail: dailynews@mediatoday.com.mt Letters must be concise, no pen names accepted, include full name and address maltatoday | SUNDAY • 28 APRIL 2019 26 April 2009 MEPA 'politically directed' not to accept frivolous ODZs MEPA was given a "political direction" to "strict- ly monitor" all outside development zone (ODZ) applications and ensure "no more frivolous use of virgin land" will be allowed, according to chairman Austin Walker in his introduction to the planning authority's annual report. Unlike previous years, MEPA has not present- ed its annual report to the press this time. But no specific directive on ODZs was issued by the Prime Minister, a spokesperson for the Office of the Prime Minister told MaltaToday. "The Prime Minister stated on various occa- sions that Government's policy is for stronger positions on Outside Development Zone appli- cations," the government spokesperson said. The authority faces a backlog of 1,703 ODZ applications, mostly in rural localities like Rabat, Siggiewi and Mellieha, while 15% of all ODZ ap- plications are from Gozo. In his report Walker made it clear that ODZ applications for infrastructural works or other constructions of national importance will still be considered but abusive development like "the overnight mushrooming of illegal structures" will be stopped. He also announced steps to en- sure "the interminable process by which one can develop land illegally and then request that this is legalised through sanctioning, is stopped and that illegalities are demolished post haste." This promise was first made by former envi- ronment minister George Pullicino in 2006. Walker made reference to "the ever-increasing demands" for more supermarkets, petrol sta- tions and schools in ODZ land. "Although each case has to be assessed on its own merits, pres- ervation of our limited open spaces and country- side has to remain our top priority," Walker said. As in previous years, MEPA's annual report includes a report by its own internal auditor Joe Falzon, who lambasted a number of permits is- sued before the election. These include permits issued right before the March 2008 election, such as a permit issued on the eve of the election for a villa and swimming pool instead of the pig farm owned by Safi mayor Pietru Pawl Busuttil. Falzon called the MEPA policy on farm diver- sification a "recipe for abuse" for allowing devel- opers to convert farm buildings into dwellings on the strength of a document from the director of veterinary services certifying that the building cannot be used for agriculture. MEPA is cur- rently evaluating the auditor's recommendation to revoke this policy. "As with all other reports the Auditor publishes the Authority evaluates and takes on board any recommendations it deems sufficiently sound that can improve the operations of its directo- rates, its policy framework and the decision mak- ing process of the MEPA boards," a spokesperson for the Authority told MaltaToday. MaltaToday 10 years ago Quote of the Week Construction sector reforms have failed Editorial "The rate of construction accidents in Malta, whether resulting in damage to neighbouring properties, injury or even death, is unacceptable." Malta's Chamber of Architects THE sudden, partial collapse of a three-storey Gwardamanga apartment block, and adjacent government driving testing office, has high- lighted in the most visceral of ways, the dangers faced by third parties having to live cheek-by- jowl with Malta's construction overdrive. In one respect, it is a blessing that a major tragedy was averted. Had this incident oc- curred at a different hour, not only would families inside the apartment block have been killed or grievously injured; but also minors taking their driving tests inside the Transport Malta ground floor level would have been buried under the rubble. Who would have picked up the bill for such a loss of life? There was no form of statement from the Malta Developers Association throughout the day that Malta witnessed the devastation of this incident. The Prime Minister played down the ramifications of this accident, preferring to tell the public that it was not reflective of the entire construction sec- tor: "When you take into consideration how much construction work is under way, we cannot use these events to characterise eve- rything from this accident, as this would not be fair to those who abide by the rules." It is perhaps true that one incident cannot be treated as a yardstick for all construction projects. But Muscat's choice of words was otherwise unfortunate. Incidents such as this do tell us a lot about the construction indus- try. Other government reactions also included a joint statement by three ministers – Home Affairs Minister Michael Farrugia, Infrastruc- ture Minister Ian Borg and Social Solidarity Minister Michael Falzon – which seemed to offer a knee-jerk defence of regulatory au- thorities such as the Building Regulation Of- fice (BRO). As with recent, similar reactions to traffic accidents on (or near) roads under construction, the government's response indicates an automatic willingness to jump to the construction sector's defence. It is disturbing, for instance, that there is already talk of 'funds' – beyond private, charitable collections – to compensate the victims who lost their homes… when there still has to be a judicial process to determine culpability. The Prime Minister's own words also point towards the underlying source of the prob- lem: "When you take into consideration how much construction work is underway…" This government has pursued an undis- guised policy to encourage and incentivise as much construction as possible – far more than the country's environment or infra- structure can sustain – to the extent that the president of the Malta developers' Associa- tion had famously urged his members to 'make hay while the sun shines'. Accidents like this happen also in part due to the sheer haste of Malta's construction mania. Implicit in Sandro Chetcuti's state- ment is the idea that the 'sun' may one day stop 'shining' – i.e., this bonanza of hastily- issued building permits might one day cease. This may explain the zeal, among develop- ers, to build as much as they can, while they still can. It also flings the doors wide open to the sort of planning 'errors' that could prove catastrophic. For this kind of large-scale collapse, though sensational, is but the tip of an ice-berg. What about the accidents and deaths on construction sites; the blatant disregard of laws and law-enforcement; noise pollution from construction, the deliberate uglification of towns and villages by those who seek to make a quick buck from land speculation; the incursion inside ODZ land and green areas, the encroachment on our kerbsides, parking spaces, and public spaces; the lack of atten- tion given to ordinary residents who find no proper police attention to the problems they face from construction sites and similar grievances...? The Gwardamanga incident must be viewed as part of a broader context, whereby buildings – like cars, in the context of road- planning – are given more importance than people. Can the Prime Minister pay attention to the social problems this mad scramble for economic growth is bringing about? Will Muscat at least concede that his govern- ment's reforms of the Planning Authority – including the establishment of BRO – have so far failed? For the reforms have failed; and not just because of the random collapse of an individ- ual building. The entire reform was viewed from the outset as a cog in the machine of economic 'progress'. Everything, even the most basic concerns for health and safety, have been sacrificed in the transaction; we are building for the sake of building, not for the sake of people. How much longer must we bear witness to the resulting aesthetic destruction of Malta? Can the Opposition leader wake up and de- cide whether the Nationalist Party is going to stand for a proper opposition to this kind of deleterious 'anarchy'? We need a solution. And that solution is clearly not going to come from either party, as a result of any election. A solution can only come in the form of a popular move- ment that demands legal changes for the elimination of loopholes, and for rule-based action rather than just vague wish-lists; or for abrogative referenda that can dead-leg the systems that are precipitating the problems we are experiencing today. The one thing we clearly cannot do, how- ever, is rely on the country's regulatory appa- ratus to do its job. A more abject failure than that is hard to even imagine.