Planning reforms must lead to a planning system that is transparent, accountable, enforceable, and fair to residents and third parties alike, the Commissioner for Environment and Planning within the Office of the Ombudsman, Alan Saliba, said.

The Commissioner has submitted a comprehensive set of recommendations as part of the Government's public consultation on the controversial planning reforms.

In his recommendations, the Commissioner highlighted a number of areas where changes are necessary.

On Appeals and permits, the Commissioner said that development permits should be suspended while appeals are pending to avoid irreversible impacts. He went on to say that "appeal procedures must be fair, consistent, and accessible, with clear safeguards against unequal deadlines and unrealistic timeframes." The Commissioner made mention of proposals his office had made in the past, concerning the suspension of the executability of development permits. These included the establishment of a new Tribunal panel to specifically handle third party appeals without impacting the timeframe of other appeals; Granting third parties the right to appeal other authorisations, including regularisations; Introducing a reward mechanism for successful third-party appellants.

"Despite these recommendations, and although the Commissioner was neither involved in the drafting process nor consulted, the proposed legislative bills failed to incorporate them."

Instead, the bills include several "inequitable and potentially oppressive measures," Commissioner Saliba said, mentioning specifically unequal appeal periods, unrealistic deadlines for appeal decisions, and inconsistent appeal procedures.

Regarding "unrealistic deadlines for appeal decisions," the Commissioner noted that imposing strict deadlines on the Tribunal for deciding appeals is presumptuous, "especially given that the Planning Authority often exceeds its 100-day decision limit by more than 180 days at first instance."

Regarding "inconsistent appeal procedures," the Commissioner said that appeals against enforcement notices should also be determined within fixed timeframes. "It is unacceptable that direct enforcement is often delayed, sometimes for years, because hearings are deferred, often due to pending sanctioning applications or applicants' failure to comply with document requests."

"Additionally, the bills do not address an existing anomaly: permits revoked by the courts are sometimes reissued simply because an appellant failed to submit a new representation. All appellants to the original development should be considered interested third parties in any subsequent application."

Regarding policy hierarchy, the Commissioner said it should be based on substantive importance, not chronological order. "Policies and guidelines should follow Local Plans and Spatial Strategies regardless of publication dates." The Commissioner added that failure to regularly update these instruments should not justify their disregard.

"Departures from plans, strategies, and policies-especially those based on technical assessments and subject to public consultation-should not be allowed arbitrarily."

Regarding enforcement and regularization, the Commissioner said allowing ODZ developments to be regularised in exchange for payment of high fines "is unjust and unsustainable. Unlike developments within development zones, ODZ applications involve more rigorous processing and inter-agency consultation."

Regularisation should never replace proper enforcement, "particularly when a formal sanctioning process is already in place and enforcement efforts are being delayed as a result," Commissioner Saliba said. While he said that short-term concessions may offer temporary relief, the Commissioner strongly advocates for strengthening enforcement measures including raising the maximum fine, currently set at €50,000, "to more appropriately reflect the seriousness of infringements within Outside Development Zones."

Additionally, the Commissioner recommends that revenue generated from such concessions be allocated to clearly defined public benefit projects.

On the issue of the validity of permits, the Commissioner said that the Building and Construction Authority should take over responsibility for construction timeframes and the validity of permits, "reducing prolonged nuisance from stalled or extended projects. Different types of development should carry different validity periods."

"The gradual introduction of specific construction timeframes should be established per area to reduce the burden on affected residents. The assumption that a Planning Authority permit automatically grants the right to immediately commence construction should be revoked."

On the issue of public access and transparency, the Commissioner said that greater access to information, clearer consultation procedures, and fairer appeal mechanisms are needed to ensure trust and accountability in the system.

Perit Saliba noted that reforms should not only update procedures but also restore public trust "by curbing the normalisation of irregular development, ensuring that planning decisions respect both the environment and community well-being." 

The full set of recommendations submitted by the Commissioner for Environment and Planning was published on Monday by the Office of the Ombudsman.