Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/538516
4 BEFORE the 2013 election, Labour sold its proposal to split MEPA to the NGOs by giving the impression that setting-up a new Malta Envi- ronment Authority would no longer subordinate environment to MEPA's emphasis on planning. But NGOs today are concerned that the new set-up only further strengthens planning at the expense of the environment, with a balance of powers depends on the integrity and rectitude of those appointed by government to head the new au- thorities. How the system will work Planning policies will be drafted by an Executive Council, while the Planning Board will issue permits. The Executive Council will also be responsible for the administration of the authority, institutionalising a strengthening of the CEO's office after the appointment of Johann Buttigieg. The new law also says that in the execution of its functions, "the Ex- ecutive Council shall consult with the Minister." The Executive Council will be composed of an executive chair- man, appointed by the government; the chairman and deputy chairman of the Planning Board who are also appointed by government; and two members versed in matters related to building construction, health and safety or building services who are also appointed by the government. It will also include two members ap- pointed by the Malta Environment Authority. At present, policy-making is con- ducted by the MEPA board whose members are all appointed by government except for a member representing the Opposition. The board also includes a representative of NGOs chosen by government, ensuring that the opposition and NGOs have a limited say in policy- making. But this will disappear with the passing of the new law. Major planning permits will be is- sued by the Planning Board which will also include two MPs from gov- ernment and Opposition, an NGO representative chosen by govern- ment from a list of people proposed by NGOs, a representative of the local council impacted by the pro- posed application, and one repre- sentative of the Malta Environment Authority. This means that only one of 14 members of the new Planning Board will hail from the Malta En- vironment Authority. But the Envi- ronment Authority will now have a right to appeal against decisions of the Planning Board in front of the newly set up Review Tribunal. It remains to be seen whether the physical divorce between the plan- ning and environment authority will result in more or less consultation between the planning and environ- ment divisions. The greatest fear of environmen- talists is that consultation with the Environment Authority will be rel- egated to that presently conducted with external bodies like the Malta Tourism Authority and Transport Malta. But while presently the Environ- ment Protection Directorate is di- rectly consulted on every applica- tion from the start to the end of the process, it is not clear whether this will be the case in the new planning structures, especially in view of the fact that the way permits are issued still has to be determined by a legal notice. In fact the most radical planning reform, which would see most per- mits approved without a public hearing, is absent from the law and will be enacted through a legal no- tice. The government has already de- clared its intention to introduce a fast-track procedure to apply for ap- plications which fall within the de- velopment zone and are not located in the urban conservation area, which are deemed to comply with present policies. A consultation document issued in April 2014 proposed a system in which the Planning Directorate will be preparing a recommendation to the Chairman of the Planning Board within two weeks from submission. If accepted, the application is validated and permission will be issued and advertised in the press within two weeks from decision by the Chairman. Although limited to development within development zones, these applications may still have an environmental impact on matters like urban open spaces, air quality and transport issues. Moreover it remains to be seen how the Environment Authority will scrutinise applications requiring the full planning procedure. The risk is that while the new Envi- ronment Authority will have a right to appeal against decisions taken by the Planning Board in front of a review tribunal whose members are also chosen by government, it may lose its power to influence planning applications in their infancy. Actually the law is lop sided in giv- ing more power to the Environment authority in the final stage where it can appeal while weakening its pow- er in the initial stages. maltatoday, WEDNESDAY, 8 JULY 2015 News Feed-In Tariffs Scheme for Electricity Generated from Solar Photovoltaic Installations The Malta Resources Authority will be holding an information meeting regarding the Feed In tariff Scheme for Electricity Generated from Solar Photovoltaic Installations Retailers are invited to attend. The meeting will to be held on: Thursday 9 th July at Project House Floriana at 1pm NGOs hit out at lack of time given to analyze MEPA demerger TIM DIACONO THE government was hit with a barrage of criticism from en- vironmental NGOs who argued that they were not given enough time to analyse three laws through which MEPA will be split into two separate authori- ties – one for planning and the other for the environment. Din l-Art Helwa council mem- ber Petra Caruana Dingli told an urgently-called parliamen- tary environment and planning committee that she had only re- ceived an invitation to the com- mittee by e-mail at 8:50pm on Monday night, and only read it yesterday morning. The committee was chaired by Labour whip Godfrey Farru- gia, rather than its usual chair- person – Farrugia's partner and fellow Labour MP Marlene Far- rugia, an outspoken critic of the government's environmental track record. Caruana Dingli quoted the Aarhus Convention, of which Malta is a signatory, as saying that the government should "al- low for public consultation at an appropriate stage on rules that could have an effective im- pact on the environment" The government on Fri- day published three new Bills through which MEPA will be split into two separate planning and environment authorities. Alternattiva Demokratika chairman Arnold Cassola warned that the MEPA frag- mentation will strengthen the developers' lobby and weaken the environment. He criticised the current and previous gov- ernment for "appointing pup- pets and poodles at MEPA, who are there to take orders from the Prime Minister rather than to protect the environment." Similar criticism was aired by Flimkien ghal Ambjent Ahjar coordinator Astrid Vella, who said that MEPA cannot be truly reformed if politicians don't take a step back in the appoint- ment of its officials. Front Harsien ODZ spokes- person David Pisani repeated his movement's accusation of the government trying to "steamroll" over civil society. "The Bills are so long and a proper analysis would have also involved comparing them with the existent laws," Pisani said, calling on the government to extend the consultation period over the summer. But parliamentary secretary for planning Michael Falzon re- torted that a four-week consul- tation period was held back in 2014 and that it "wasn't the gov- ernment's problem" if the Front wasn't in existence back then. FHODZ spokesperson Mon- qiue Agius said that the govern- ment was not really "a govern- ment that listens" – as it touted in its public consultation meet- ings – and called on Parliament to postpone its debate until af- ter the NGOs are given enough time to analyze the Bills. "Who is an absolutist? Is it the government who is consult- ing with the public today with NGOs who were hardly given any time to come up with prop- er propels, before discussing it in Parliament in tomorrow? Or is it us who are trying to protect the environment?" The government plans to close the second reading of the Bill before Parliament breaks for its summer recess, and to proceed with the third and final reading when Parliament reconvenes. The public has been given four weeks to submit their proposal. However, Opposition MPs Marthese Portelli and Ryan Callus, along with a number of eNGOs, interjected that the second reading should be post- poned until the completion of the public consultation process, thereby allowing politicians to debate according to the opin- ions of civil society. "We risk missing a golden op- portunity," Callus warned. "The decisions we take today will im- pact the future for a long time to come, both for environmen- talists and developers. If we get it wrong, we will get it wrong for many years to come. Why is the government so against postponing the debate for four weeks? Four weeks won't cost anything." However, environment min- ister Leo Brincat said that any valid recommendations made by NGOs during the consulta- tion period will be taken on board during the third read- ing, when legal details are dis- cussed. "All main eNGOs had agreed in principle to the MEPA de- merger back in 2013," he re- counted. "Yes, the devil is in the detail, but the detail will be dis- cussed at committee stage." The Opposition then suggest- ed that the committee meeting be adjourned and that the four- week consultation answer to the committee. However, Godfrey Farrugia said that this was only possible if government and Opposition MPs unanimously agreed to it. The government rejected, with Brincat insisting that he was acting according to parliamen- tary procedure. Portelli accused the govern- ment of "only pretending to be one that listens", with Callus heard muttering as he left the room, "What a waste of time." After the divorce, planning unbound? As foreseen in Labour's electoral manifesto, a new system will see a Malta Environmental Authority and a Malta Planning Authority. But will the divorce simply free planning from any environmental bondage, JAMES DEBONO asks? The protagonists in the MEPA demerger: (from left) Environment minister Leo Brincat, junior minister for planning Micheal Falzon, MEPA chairman Vince Cassar and MEPA CEO Johann Buttigieg