The reforms announced by Minister George Pullicino this week, through which MEPA would use aerial reconnaissance photos to be able to demolish any building built outside development zones after May 2007, constitute a welcome and long overdue step in the often tortuous road to environmental self-regulation.
According to the new scheme, any building not appearing in aerial photos taken in May will be furnished with an enforcement order and finally removed. This represents the abolition of a major anomaly in the planning process, which has time and again exposed MEPA to public ridicule.
Entire hotels, villas, countryside roads and buildings have been erected illegally outside development zones, only to be sanctioned at a later date. Even the PN-led Munxar council had applied to sanction an illegal road on the scenic cliffs above Xlendi. By taking this initiative, the Minister has partially restored his governmentís green credentials which had taken another nosedive after MEPAís controversial Ramla l-Hamra decision.
Pullicino had made the promise not to allow MEPA to sanction ODZ buildings back in May 2006, when he announced the infamous extension of development schemes. It was a sugary pill aimed at making the extension more palatable to environmentalists. For months, however, Pullicino struggled to get the new enforcement system approved by Cabinet. In February, MaltaToday reported that the courageous decision taken by Pullicino was being blocked at Cabinet level. It was only after MEPAís decision to allow the redevelopment of Ulysses Lodge in Ramla l-Hamra, which plunged the governmentís green credentials to an all-time low, that the new clampdown on illegalities was finally announced.
Ironically, the clampdown on ODZ illegalities also coincides with the presentation of an Environmental Impact Statement for the Taí Cenc development: another project which lies outside the development zones. If MEPA were to approve this project, it would be tantamount to undermining the governmentís otherwise laudable initiative.
While it is very good that illegal ODZ development after May 2007 will be demolished, the same courage should be shown when confronting ODZ applications in areas of scenic beauty and natural and historical importance. MEPA should stop getting itself embroiled in discussions with developers proposing ODZ developments like Taí Cenc. The very meaning of ODZ should be clear ñ these areas should be free from development.
Other reforms proposed by Minister Pullicino are also positive. These include the creation of a separate appeals board dealing with enforcement cases within existing schemes. In the past, people have appealed vexatiously to the Planning Appeals Board with the clear intention of delaying procedures. Some have appealed against enforcement while applying to sanction the same illegal developments. There are cases involving illegally built villas which have been caught in the backlog of MEPAís appeals board for a number of years. With the latest reforms, the new appeals board will have to decide these cases in six weeks.
It is also positive that the maximum fine against illegal developments has been raised from Lm1,000 to Lm10,000.
Still, the reforms will not remedy the sins of the past. Owners of illegal developments preceding May 2007 will still be able to sanction their illegalitiesÖ creating a non-level playing field which castigates todayís developers, while at the same time allowing earlier offenders to reap the benefit of their illegally constructed buildings. This means that entire boathouse villages like the ones in MíScala, Gnejna and Armier, all built illegally over the past years, may not be affected by the new law. One sincerely hopes that this is not the case. Seeing as MEPA possesses aerial photos dating back to 1998, one cannot understand why an earlier date was not used as a cut off pointÖ unless the idea is to ìstrike a balanceî: an oft-used euphemism for turning a blind eye to illegality.
At the end of the day, the new scheme ought to be understood in the context of an antidote to last yearís intensely unpopular extension of the development zones. Time will tell if the authorities are finally going to be serious in their attempts to clamp down on construction abuses, or whether the new scheme will simply go down as another pre-electoral stunt to keep the environmentalists happy.
Until then, however, the initiative remains one to be applauded, if only for its declared intention.