A number of NGOs argued that not enough time was given for them to read through the three bills relating to the MEPA demerger and form their opinions.
The Parliamentary Environment and Development Planning Committee are currently discussing three new bills regarding the MEPA demerger. One regarding Development and Planning, one regarding environment protection and one regarding the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal.
Minister Leo Brincat said that government never intended or aimed to move forward with the MEPA demerger legislation in a stealthy manner explaining that government never planned for the bills to be completely enacted into law prior to the Summer Parliamentary break.
Written submissions will be accepted until four weeks from yesterday..
Government wants the second reading through before Parliament breaks for recess, and the Committee stage will then occur when Parliament reconvenes.
The Demerger would also see the Planning Authority only hand out development permits after all other permits have been granted. For example, if a development requires an MTA permit, that would be required prior to the granting of the actual development permit.
As for the Tribunal, it was said that the Environment Authority would have the power to challenge decisions by the Planning Authority through an independent Tribunal.
The Committee was listening to Civil Society after the first reading occurred in Parliament.
Minister Leo Brincat said that he accepts criticism, he said, however cleared up some points. The first regards the accusation that government is trying to stealthily pass this legislation. He said that many suggestions given by society had been taken on board, and that on 16th June, he passed PN MP Marthese Portelli copies of all three bills.
"Last Wednesday, I tabled all the bills with the Speaker and they were technically public domain, and these were published on the Government Gazette on Friday".
On Monday, we sent a request for this hearing to occur, with urgency, with the principle aim to give the urgency and relevancy as requested by Din L-Art Helwa.
He emphasised the distinction between the second reading and the Committee stage. "If we tried to pass the end reading as well as the Committee stage prior to the Parliamentary recess, then yes, that would be passing it by stealth, however the aim has always been just to pass the 2nd reading stage and not the Committee stage prior to the recess".
Any suggestions that there could be will be taken on board and evaluated during the Committee stage and not the 2nd reading, he explained.
PN MP Mathese Portelli said that too little time has passed for NGOs to be able to really give their opinions on the bill. The PN wanted to give enough time to everyone to consult as they need.
We asked for this meeting to take place as well. We appreciate the fact that this meeting is taking place, however it is too much of a short notice.
"If we truly want consultation on these laws, how can the public and NGOs understand everything within 24 hours, they must be given adequate time".
The PN believes that the Plenary discussion should occur after discussions with the public and NGOs conclude.
Din L-Art Helwa representative Petra Caruana Dingli said that she received the invite for this Committee at 8.50pm last night and it was impossible for them to prepare anything regarding the legislation in such a short time. She requested more time in order to gather their thoughts.
She mentioned the Aarhus convention, with regards to public partecipation on legislation. Malta is a signatory, and it reads that every country will hold consultation on issues which affect the environment. Time Frames for effective partecipation shall be fixed and the public should be given the opportunity to comment through the respective bodies, she said.
AD Chairman Arnold Cassola said he learnt about the meeting this morning through the media. He said that the Environment should be stronger that the Planning Authority. He also added that the persons chosen to sit on Boards should not sit there to take orders from the Office of the Prime Minister, but should be there to look at the needs of the environment.
Dr Cassola added that a Parliamentary Committee should be formed to survey all the processes ongoing within MEPA.
AD Deputy Chairman Carmel Cacopardo explained that the choice of regulators should be nominated by government, and those people would be scrutinised through Parliament.
The AD representatives were against the fragmentation of MEPA, arguing that it would weaken the environment side. They argued for an end to political interference in MEPA and that more human resources be granted to MEPA.
They also want a Parliamentary Committee to oversee MEPA operations. Carmel Cacopardo questioned whether regulators should be appointed by government or whether they should be nominated by government, and scrutinised by Parliament.
Minister Brincat conceded that according to Aarhus 4 weeks are needed, and written submissions will be accepted for the next 4 weeks.
PN MP Ryan Callus said that tomorrow Plenary will open to discuss the law. “We need to debate what the NGOs and the public will say. It does not make sense to debate the environment laws prior to this”.
The PN appealed that the 2nd reading debate should not start tomorrow.
David Pisani from Front Harsien ODZ said there was consensus that not enough time for discussion was given. He reiterated that government is trying to steamroll over the NGOs by doing this. At this point, Parliamentary Secretary Michael Falzon said that in 2014 there were 4 weeks of consultation on this.
PN MP Marthese Portelli agreed with Mr Pisani and stressed that the consultation on the laws released late last week have not given much time.
Monique Agius, also from the Front, said that this is meant to be a “government that listens, yet we weren’t given a chance to prepare for consultation when the Parliamentary discussion will begin tomorrow. If you really want to listen to the public, this consultation should have been postponed and the Parliamentary debate should occur after the consultation”.
Elena Portelli from Friends of the Earth said that this was a cosmetic meeting as the bills were only just distributed to their members and not enough time was given. The NGO agrees that 4 weeks are needed for more consultation.
PN MP Marthese Portelli argued that MEPA should create an impartial document showing the difference between current legislation and the bills, for ENGOs to have a point of reference. Government must help. She reiterated her hope that the 2nd reading will be postponed until after the consultation period.
Dr Brincat explained that a number of suggestions made in the first consultation period were incorporated. He stressed that the Opposition have had the bills since 16th June, thus had enough time to examine the documents.
He argued that tomorrow’s 2nd reading will discuss the broad outline, and each clause will be scrutinised in the Committee stage not in the 2nd reading.
Marthese Portelli then said that the Minister confirmed no consultation took place on the documents presented last Friday. “We have no problem debating in Plenary, but to truly understand what the public want we must first hear what they want. I urge you to include all the NGO proposals, not like you did during the SPED discussions”.
FAA Coordinator Astrid Vella said that if the debate takes place tomorrow, it would go against EU regulations, as one cannot hold an informed debate without the input of Civil Society. “We read what we can of the law and have one cardinal point, regarding the appointment of officials. The Bill states that the appointments will be with the approval of the Minister. We believe this was always the problem within MEPA. She brought up the issue where MEPA CEO Johan Buttigieg was obeying orders that came from above. Having Officials working within MEPA going according to the wishes of those who appointed them has always been the problem. Until MEPA is independent we will never see good regulation in this regard.
She said that any change in MEPA should focus on strengthening the Environment Directorate, which we do not see in these laws, which brings the environment down to just a consultative role.
Malta Developers Association representative Sandro Chetcuti said that the bills are unbalanced against the developers, adding that the environment will have an Authority that overshadows the developers. "All we ask is for a chance to discuss the relevant points. We have nothing against the environment strengthening and in fact it would create a fairer level playing field".
PN MP Ryan Callus questions what the issue would be with postponing the 2nd reading debate. “Do you not feel the responsibility on your shoulders to insist that the debate take place in 4 weeks time?” He asked the Environment Minister. He highlighted that government had once said it didn’t want to rush these bills through.
“These documents will determine a number of procedures. We want sustainable development. I hope we can come to agreement on this. Personally we are happy this consultation is taking place, however if we truly want to listen to societies ideas, then we need to give them time. It is not in the interest of the environment or the developers to rush. If we get it wrong it will remain wrong for a very long time”.
PL MP Charles Buhagiar again explained that the 2nd reading is just a general discussion, and not the finer points or the clauses. The proposals will not reach this Committee, but would reach government. He argued that planning has an impact on the environment, and so does construction, however they are different. MEPA must overlook development, however there are different laws that surround construction, and the distinction needs to be made.
Government's environmental credentials hit rock bottom says Din l-Art Helwa
Following today's meeting of the Standing Committee for Planning and the Environment, Din l-Art Helwa states that it is nonsensical for the three MEPA Demerger Bills to be discussed in the plenary session at Parliament tomorrow morning, when Government has just agreed to a four-week public consultation period.
This insistence by government to open the debate tomorrow without waiting for the consultation to take place, turns the process into a complete sham.
Minister Leo Brincat and Parliamentary Secretary Michael Falzon have denied civil society the opportunity to put forward their concerns in a transparent and effective manner, says the NGO.
The proposals for the Demerger of Mepa are set to strengthen the hands of developers and to weaken the environmental voice in planning decisions.