Nine environmental and heritage organisations have formally objected to a proposed Planning Authority (PA) policy that would allow large commercial obstacle racecourses to be developed in ODZ areas, warning that it could weaken countryside protection and threaten agricultural land and natural habitats.
In a statement, the organisations raised strong objections to the proposed Planning and Design Framework for Obstacle Course Racing, arguing that it would facilitate intensive commercial activity on land intended primarily for agriculture or nature conservation.
The NGOs also questioned the proposal's designation of these facilities as temporary, pointing out that permits would be valid for five years and that inadequate enforcement, alongside other planning rules, could allow structures to remain in place indefinitely.
They warned that the policy could set a dangerous precedent for commercial development in ODZ areas, putting further pressure on farmers and potentially causing significant environmental damage.
The organisations alleged that the policy had been agreed with developers before being issued for public consultation, raising concerns about transparency and whose interests the planning process serves.
They described the proposal as another example of planning decisions being shaped behind closed doors to accommodate private interests at the expense of the public good.
The NGOs referred to previously published chats between developer Yorgen Fenech and Planning Authority chief executive Johann Buttigieg as an example of the wider concerns surrounding relationships between developers and planning officials.
The joint statement also highlighted an application submitted three years ago for an obstacle racecourse on agricultural land in Ta' Qali, which was withdrawn after the development had been recommended for refusal.
The proposal had raised concerns because it directly threatened land being cultivated by farmers. During a public hearing, the developer's architect, who was linked to the BILOM group, reportedly said that the government was preparing a policy that would allow such facilities.
The application was subsequently withdrawn while the proposed policy had yet to be published for consultation or brought into force.
For the NGOs, the episode suggests that the policy was being developed to facilitate projects of this nature before the public had been given an opportunity to scrutinise the proposed framework.
The organisations argued that the proposal would undermine ODZ safeguards, weaken the protection of natural areas and increase pressure on Malta's agricultural sector by allowing commercial activities unrelated to farming on agricultural land.
They condemned what they described as manoeuvres intended to accommodate specific private interests, warning that the consequences could extend beyond individual sites to the protection of the countryside more broadly.
The NGOs said they would continue to oppose the policy if the government insisted on proceeding with it.
The statement was signed by BirdLife Malta, Din l-Art Ħelwa, Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar, Friends of the Earth Malta, Għawdix, Moviment Graffitti, Nature Trust Malta, the Ramblers Association Malta and Wirt Għawdex.