By voting in favour of the new development boundaries, the government came out of this lengthy and much-needed process with its head held high, Environment and Rural Affairs Minister George Pullicino said yesterday.

Speaking to the media the day after Parliament approved the new development zones, Minister Pullicino said he still could not understand Labour’s position during the committee meetings and arguments during the House debates which he described as “a sack of contradictions”.

He said the process to finally close off development boundaries and address anomalies had begun in 1987 when the newly elected PN government had found a mess with regard to land permits and where agricultural land was being lost at the rate of 200 hectares per year (or the equivalent of two villages the size Siggiewi).

Minister Pullicino said the Temporary Development Schemes drawn up in 1988 were an attempt to stop the haemorrhage of land that had reached alarming levels.

He said the PN government had clearly stated in 1999 that the temporary schemes had to be revised.

The minister criticised the opposition for its ambivalent and inconsistent attitude throughout the 10 debates in Parliament. He said he had to intervene several times on a point of order to correct erroneous statements made by several Labour MPs who were clearly misinformed.

Minister Pullicino said it was ironic that opposition MPs appeared together with environmentalists and then made submissions for more land to be included in the development zone. He outlined cases where Labour MPs Charles Buhagiar and Roderick Galdes wanted to include more land for development in Kalkara, Xghajra, Siggiewi, Msida, Mellieha, Salina, Zebbug, Mtarfa and Zebbiegh.

The minister queried how, after voting on the first few plans in the Environment Committee, the Labour MPs suddenly began to vote against because of an “order” to do so from the higher echelons in the party. “Was this the free vote that Labour MPs had been given?” he asked.

Minister Pullicino said the opposition had only spoken against five sites located in Attard (two), Naxxar, Safi and Zurrieq. He explained that in the case of Attard, the Ta’ Qali Action Plan included the removal of the potato shed and its replacement with housing units.

The opposition said Minister Pullicino, had protested against around 191,000 square metres of development – which was 14 per cent of the total amount of land to be proposed.

However, the minister said, they had come up with suggestions for a further 251,000 square metres of land which meant that the whole exercise would have been much larger if their proposals were taken into account.

The minister also outlined a case when Mr Buhagiar had asked for a substantial amount of land in Msida to be included in the development zone. He mentioned another application by Mr Buhagiar where 15 tumoli of land in Mosta were submitted to be included in the scheme and where the latter had asked for “more flexible criteria” to be applied in this case.

Minister Pullicino criticised the opposition’s attitude to the rationalisation exercise especially Labour Leader Alfred Sant’s statement that anomalies should have been addressed on a “case by case” basis. He said that the Chamber of Architects had actually proposed 232,000 square metres of land for development in a consultation document prepared by the Building Industry Consultative Council for the South Malta Local Plan but it had strangely declared itself against this open and transparent exercise.

The minister said there were social partners who supported the rationalisation exercise including Gozo Bishop Emeritus Nikol Cauchi, the Gozo Curia, the BICC, the GRTU and other organisations. He said that this government had the courage to finally carry out the much needed and long awaited reforms to the Temporary Development Schemes and came out of the process with its head held high.

“I voted in favour of the new boundaries with a clean conscience like the rest of my party,” the minister added.

Answering questions, Minister Pullicino said the government had legal advice that it was not in breach of the Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) Directive of the EU. He also maintained that not one single illegally developed building was being approved in the new boundaries.

Reacting to the Opposition Leader’s statements in relation to his trip to Sicily, the minister said this was a private visit just a few days after the death of his mother and had absolutely nothing to do with development boundaries. He said that those who had alleged that money was paid so that their land could be included into the development zone should prove these allegations and provide the evidence.