It had to be a spectacular incident for the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA) to be brought to book, and for its operational performance to come under close scrutiny.

The incident involved the excavations at the site adjacent to the St Paul’s Bay bypass that caused a mudslide last January, leaving a building sticking out dangerously in mid aid. It was then reported that no development or excavation permits for the site in question existed. The area fell outside the development scheme. Two enforcement notices had been issued, in connection with work on this site, previous to the incident (2002 – 315/02 and 2004 – 762/04). This notwithstanding, excavations continued sporadically until the mudslide incident.

Devastating observations

The 45-page inquiry report is, in parts, devastating.

The Board of Inquiry held that the developers were left to do as they pleased at the Xemxija site prior to the mudslide. It commented frankly that the planning authority is “impotent” when it comes to controlling big developers. It held that MEPA is indirectly responsible for what happened on the site, and even suggested that, besides revisions to current regulation, there is a case for “increased accountability of the planning directorate”. But the issue of personal accountability for what happened was not addressed, although it held that “in practice, the developer was left to do as he pleased, despite the fact that he is known for such behaviour, as becomes clears from the testimony given by the planning director”. It added that “MEPA is guilty in this regard because it sanctioned illegal projects by the same developer to avoid taking different actions which could have been more difficult”.

The Board criticised MEPA for only using the stop notice as its tool to halt illegal excavations. Although stop notices have been issued, the developer was never notified to bring the site back to the state it was in before the excavations.

Proposals

The Board has now recommended that the developer should be made to rehabilitate the area, as far as possible, after submitting a detailed method statement to MEPA on how this will be done. It has also expressed the view that MEPA should use all the clout afforded to it by law, including the confiscation and sale by auction of the developer’s equipment, if he even “dares” carrying on with illegal work at Xemxija.

It called for the “immediate” amendment to the law to raise the maximum fine for breach of planning laws and proposed that, if and when illegal development is carried out in the name of a company, the courts should have the power to force its liquidation, and that all the directors be held legally responsible.

The government’s first reaction to the report was that it “was looking into the conclusions” and is open to suggestions that would lead to better enforcement of the existing law.

This gives the impression that the government is not so much concerned with what has transpired up to now, as with what could be done in the future. What’s worse, the government’s reaction points at opening yet another debate on the way forward, and seems to imply that bygones will be bygones.

No wonder big developers could not be controlled in the past. At MEPA and at political level, the powers-that-be have been, and continue to be, strong with the weak and weak with the strong.

Democratic considerations

The Xemxija Inquiry Board has exposed this situation and brought out this issue into broad daylight.

The issue is one that has a bearing on the democratic vocation of our institutions and has the potential of inducing all concerned to take a long, hard look at the way power is exercised in the Republic of Malta, which is an EU Member State, and how the powers-that-be are expected to react to the slightest odour of corruption.

The problem it poses will not be solved by lying low, and much less by evasive action or by interminable debates that lead nowhere.

Malta needs a government that delivers the goods.

[email protected]