On Friday, the government will be holding a national conference to discuss the plans it announced for a major overhaul of the way the Malta Environment and Planning Authority operates.

It is a bold step forward. For too many years, Mepa has been allowed to drift away from the original concept of its inception, becoming an entity which needed better control and a revamp in order to satisfy the growing needs of a better balance between development and the protection of the environment.

As Parliamentary Secretary Mario de Marco told this paper's Sunday sister yesterday, the way forward is to bring Mepa more in line with present day requirements and give the authority the necessary resources for it to work more efficiently and more consistently.

The reform will not make Mepa perfect. There will still be people who will object to decisions that will be taken. There will still be loopholes. And there will still be environmental organisations who will say that it is not doing its job well.

But the idea is to have a much stronger, more organised entity that does away with the lack of uniformity that it has often been accused of. The reform is also intended to ensure the elimination of unnecessary delays that are often the cause of complaints.

The four pillars on which the reform will be built are consistency, accountability, enforcement and efficiency. All are necessary for the authority to do justice, and be seen to be doing justice, with applicants, objectors and third parties. Naturally, the authority cannot please all at the same time - because they have different interests - but if the public perception improves, and if the people see that the authority is carrying out its duties properly, within established parameters and without fear or favour, then it stands a good chance of regaining the trust it has lost.

One matter that has not been so well-received since the publication of the reform document is the idea to set up a planning policy unit within the Office of the Prime Minister. Detractors have accused the government of wanting more control over planning matters.

But this concept is being suggested to simply determine the different responsibilities that the government will have as the country's administrative body, and the authority which will have the duty to implement the strategy as directed by the government.

It is understandable that it should be the government that gives the direction that it would want the country to take. Obviously, this will be done with all the possible help that Mepa itself and other stakeholders will give. But ultimately it will be the government's duty to delineate the road that the country should be taking. Then, it will be Mepa, as the regulating body, that will put into practice this strategy through its decisions.

One problem could be finding people - the right people - to take up full-time jobs with the Development Control Commission. This is a gamble that the government is taking. Yet it was awkward to have the same people doing their job as applicants one day, and adjudicators the next. This anomaly will hopefully be rectified once the reform goes through.

The opposition has taken an approach that is more or less in line with that of the government. We will still however have to wait and see what position it will be taking once the plans are drafted into legislation and this is presented for discussion in Parliament.

What is sure is that the reform - an electoral promise made by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi - aims to address the problems that have infested Mepa for too many years.