Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/433160
12 PARLIAMENTARY Secretary Michael Falzon's office is adorned with cartoons depicting him in vari- ous postures, which appeared in dif- ferent newspapers, including some of the most irreverent once published in MaltaToday, which occupy the most prominent place behind his desk. "I do not mind being criticised," says Falzon as we sit down for an in- terview in his office in Castille. Falzon also makes it clear that his style of politics is that of avoiding personal attacks, while accepting that being in the public spotlight exposes him to criticism and even mockery. His mission statement is simple. On government land he wants "govern- ment to get what is due to it". On planning, his goal is to imple- ment the electoral promise to sepa- rate planning from the environment and to enact "courageous" policies, promising that he will not be afraid of taking decisions which will not be to everyone's liking. One such decision will be whether to tweak development zones once again as the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA) starts drafting the new local plans over the next years. Falzon makes it clear that this is a case where the government has to take decisions. "When you are elect- ed to government, one is not expect- ed to sit back, but to take decisions. One has to consult with everyone but after that, one has to decide. Consul- tation does not mean never taking a decision." Will the new local plans pave the way for more ODZ development? "The general political direction is that the new local plans will not dou- ble or triple the size of the develop- ment zone…We are saying clearly that as far as possible the develop- ment zone will not increase." But why not simply keep the devel- opment zone the same as it is today? "When the previous government extended development zones in 2006 there were great abuses. Great crea- tivity was used in extending bounda- ries in certain areas while leaving out plots of land, even if surrounding lands were included in the develop- ment zone. Our clear direction is to ensure that development zones are not increased as far as possible but even from an aesthetic point of view it would make sense to include lands which were left out unfairly." But Falzon insists that "there is no intention to repeat the obscenities of 2006." One issue, which is bound to create controversy, is land reclamation. Last year, the government received 21 proposals for land reclamation projects, after it issued a call for ex- pressions of interest that closed in December. Falzon's predecessor, Michael Far- rugia, had announced an exhibition of the project proposals, which was due to be held in January, but this never materialised. "There is nothing wrong in being cautious," says Falzon who insists that land reclamation is still on the government's cards. Falzon makes it clear that the gov- ernment will not go for 21 land recla- mation projects. "We have to consider many fac- tors, including the level of investment needed and the environmental con- siderations." So far the government has analyzed all these applications. "At this stage we have a clear idea on where we can start and it is clearly not our intention to go for 21 projects at one go." When asked for a timeframe he hints that studies on some of these projects would start some time next year. Will it be just another real estate project? "We are not exclusively looking at real estate projects." But Falzon also points out that real estate remains "economically crucial" for Malta and that some investors would be looking at recovering their investment through some real estate. "But we will be vigilant to ensure that land reclamation will not consist of standalone real estate projects… we have to look for new niches of tourism and development." But in the end he will take a deci- sion which will "strike a balance". "It is the nature of my portfolio to make choices and I won't refrain from making them," he adds. He recognises that pressures on the government to allocate land for de- velopment are huge. "With the demands we have on pub- lic land, I can ensure that even if we have a country as large as Australia, in 20 years we would have dispensed it all… We have to acknowledge our limits and that we cannot increase the size of the country in any signifi- cant way, not even through land rec- lamation." Is the seabed opposite the Bahar ic- Caghaq coastline being considered for land reclamation? What Falzon rejects outrightly is "having three or four land reclama- tion projects" at Bahar ic-Caghaq. "We are not talking about Bahar ic-Caghaq only… Although Bahar ic- Caghaq is not being excluded there will be no concentration of land rec- lamation projects in this area." He also insists that no final decision has been taken, that all proposals are being considered and that "no par- ticular area is being privileged over the rest." What can surely be excluded are the Gozitan coastline and the entire coast between Cirkewwa and the Freeport (on the Paradise Bay to Zurrieq side) as this would be "physically impos- sible". An area near between Marsaskala and Xghajra was seen as the most feasible option in a report prepared under the previous government. But Falzon doubts whether this is pos- sible, due to the depth of the sea in this area. A consultation document entitled "For an efficient planning system" proposed removing the blanket ban on the regularisation of development outside development zones (ODZ) and scheduled areas, such as areas of ecological and scientific importance. Article 70 of the Environment and Development Planning Act enacted by the previous government in De- cember 2010, prohibited the MEPA from regularising any illegal devel- opments built in ODZ, or scheduled areas. According to the consultation document, the deletion of the sixth schedule will be replaced by the im- position of daily fines: ostensibly, this would mean that daily fines start fall- ing due from the day somebody ap- plies to regularise their illegal devel- opment, to the date that MEPA issues permission. Falzon points out that the prohibi- tion of sanctioning has not led to any improvement. "What is the use of prohibiting MEPA from sanctioning illegalities when these illegalities simply remain in place…this is like crying wolf say- ing that we can't ever regularise these buildings while effectively leaving everything as it is, with society gain- ing nothing in return?" he asks. Instead Falzon prefers to impose daily fines. But what is the use of imposing dai- ly fines when certain illegal establish- ments like restaurants in scheduled sites simply finance this additional cost from the additional table covers on illegally occupied land. "We will ensure that the daily fines will be worked out in a way that this calculation will no longer be possi- ble." Falzon contends that the Sixth Schedule has not been a serious enough deterrent against illegal de- velopment, and higher fines may be even more effective. Can't one do both; raise fines and keep the ban on regularising illegal developments in protected areas? Falzon acknowledges that this may well be the case, making it clear that a decision has yet to be taken as the document is still being discussed. But he hints that the choice ultimately "is between demolishing all illegal build- ings without society gaining anything in return, or imposing exorbitant fines which would serve as an effec- tive deterrent for the future while al- lowing the possibility of sanctioning in some cases". But he also makes it clear that al- lowing MEPA to sanction illegal de- velopments in ODZ areas does not necessarily mean that all such devel- opment will be regularised. MEPA has recently approved a new policy regulating development in ODZ areas. The document proposes a myriad of new small-scale developments in the countryside, ranging from stables and retail shops, to visitor centres, while allowing new developments for agro tourism on 60 tumoli sites. I express my doubts on MEPA's ability to ensure that these agricul- tural developments do not serve as a smokescreen for more residential development. In fact one of the prob- lems in the past was that structures approved as stables ended up being used as dwellings. Considering MEPA's poor track record on enforcement, is the new policy a recipe for abuse? Falzon immediately points out that one effective deterrent against abuse, in the case of stables, is that part of any new stable will have to be built in timber. Moreover the policy also contains various clauses, which require ap- plicants for developments like ODZ wineries or agro tourism, to enter in- to legally binding agreements, which forbid them from changing the use of these structures. "We cannot use the lack of enforce- ment as an excuse for doing nothing. What we have to do is strengthen the enforcement structures." MEPA has also approved a policy on fireworks factories complexes, which sets parameters for the development of new ODZ factories and for the ex- tension of older ones. A draft of this policy was prepared by a commit- tee chaired by Michael Falzon –who previously was a legal advisor to the Malta Pyrotechnics Association. Falzon, who rejects any insinuation that he had a conflict of interest, im- mediately makes it clear that when he chaired this committee he had no clue that he would end up being appoint- ed parliamentary secretary responsi- ble for planning. He recalls jokingly, telling the MEPA board "thank you… I hope I will never have to come here again" upon presenting the policy on March 27, only to receive a phone call from the Prime Minister the follow- ing Saturday that he was going to ap- point him as the new PS responsible for MEPA. In his submissions on the new policy, chemist Prof. Alfred Vella welcomed the fact that MEPA intended allowing new fireworks factories as he had rec- ommended in 2010 to improve safety, but the same expert insisted that the new policy would be counter produc- tive if not accompanied by quotas Interview By James Debono maltatoday, SUNDAY, 14 DECEMBER 2014 I will take (tough) ON ODZ "Our clear direction is to ensure that development zones are not increased as far as possible but even from an aesthetic point of view it would make sense to include lands which were left out unfairly in 2006" ON LAND RECLAMATION "Although Bahar ic- Caghaq is not being excluded there will be no concentration of land reclamation projects in this area… I can exclude having three or four land reclamation projects there"