New law allows developers to hide behind ‘anonymous submissions’

A new planning law that was until yesterday being rushed through parliament before the summer recess, will give developers the opportunity to propose changes to their own advantage, without ‘showing their cards’.

By law every citizen can comment and submit proposals on any new planning policy or plans being discussed, and these comments are published together with the replies given by the Planning Authority to each comment.

This will not change in the new planning law except for one important detail: while at present anyone making a submission to MEPA has his name published, the new planning law would allow people to submit their comments anonymously.  

That means architects and developers with a vested interest in developing particular parcels of land, will be able to submit their comments on public consultations anonymously.

While the law approved in 2010 simply stated that when a plan or policy has been prepared, the Authority has to publish “a statement of the representations it has received and the responses it has made to those representations,” the new law states that the Authority should publish a statement of the representations “whether anonymous or otherwise”, and the responses it has made to those representations.

In the past, the publication of these names enabled newspapers like MaltaToday to establish a link between the final changes to plans and policies and the influence of vested interests on the planning process.

The change was not proposed in a consultation document on the proposed demerger of the environmental and planning arms of MEPA issued in April 2014. Moreover, this is the second attempt by the government to introduce secrecy in the planning process.

In July 2013, the Malta Environment and Planning Authority announced that it was granting anonymity to anyone proposing changes to the local plans. The startling announcement was made in a power point presentation by MEPA as it launched public discussions for the forthcoming changes to the local plans – the guides to all decisions related to planning applications. MEPA cited “data protection” as the justification for this change in policy. MEPA’s intention was to publish the reference number given to each submission – and not the name and surname of the person making the comment or submission.

But the publication of the names of the architects and companies proposing changes to Malta’s local plans was deemed not to be in breach of privacy rules by former Information and Data Protection Commissioner, Joseph Ebejer. 

In 2013 Environmentalists Din l-Art Helwa had also criticised this decision, insisting that MEPA’s previous practice should remain: all persons and organisations that make submissions during the consultation period should be identified and not be permitted to remain anonymous. 

In fact, the decision to give developers the chance to apply a was reversed in October 2013 following the declarations of the data protection commissioner.

“In the interest of retaining the same high level of public scrutiny and transparency, MEPA has reconsidered its decision not to publish the names of individuals or organisations who submit representations or proposals for change in any land use or policy review,” a spokesperson for MEPA told MaltaToday. MEPA is obliged by law to take into account all submissions in the various phases of consultation and give a reply to each request or comment. MEPA is also obliged by law to publish the gist of every request and comment, as well as the response thereto. 

On all previous occasions, for local plans and others subject to public consultation, the names of companies and citizens submitting proposals were published alongside MEPA’s response. These included the names of architects and developers who had proposed changes and had a vested interest in developing particular parcels of land. This transparency enabled the media and NGOs to question the motivation behind the inclusion of particular plots of land in development zones or in areas with relaxed height limitations. 

ODZ no longer ODZ

The new bill also turns back the clock with regards to one of the most important reforms introduced in 2010; the ban on sanctioning illegal buildings on scheduled locations.The proposal was first made in a  consultation document “For an efficient planning system” which was issued for public consultation in April 2014. 

Presently Article 70 of the Environment and Development Planning Act enacted by the previous government in December 2010 prohibits the MEPA (Malta Environment and Planning Authority) from regularising any illegal developments built in ODZ or scheduled areas. 

The sixth schedule of the Environment and Development Planning Act also bans MEPA from regularising any illegal extension to ODZ development. 

Aerial photos taken in May 2008 were used to determine whether development had been carried out after this date, to assist MEPA in refusing any requests to ‘sanction’ these extensions. The new Article 73 which replaces Article 70 simply states that the Planning Board may “may grant permission for the retention on land of any buildings” carried out “without permission.”