One commentator, remarking about the Prime Minister's pledge during the election campaign that, if re-elected, he would personally assume direct responsibility for Mepa reform, called it "a Damascene conversion, no doubt prompted by the need to manoeuvre for electoral advantage". It was indubitably so - and none the worse for that. The Prime Minister had wisely concluded that Mepa was one of the central issues of the electoral campaign - an albatross around the government's neck which could lose it the election - and that only by staking his reputation on solving "the environmental deficit" as he had done with the economy could the situation be rescued. The election has been won and, true to his word, the Prime Minister has placed both Mepa and the environment within the Office of the Prime Minister. He has vowed to reform the planning/environment watchdog "to eliminate totally all suspicions of irregular practice, remote as these might be... to reduce inconsistencies in its decisions so that nobody will feel that he or she has been treated differently from other people". The auditor's report into the infamous Mistra development case appears to be an object lesson in this.

By placing Mepa under his direct control, the Prime Minister has taken on a formidable task, perhaps greater than he realises. This is not simply because of the crucial importance of Mepa in terms of planning and environmental protection and the intense political, economic and development pressures under which it operates but also because of the central role it plays in the well-being and quality of life of ordinary people.

Whether the Prime Minister's move will prove wise, only time will tell. But what is indisputable is the need for action both in overcoming the environmental deficit and in ensuring that the main instrument for doing so, Mepa, is up to the job. If Mepa does not function efficiently its damaging effects are felt by everybody.

Mepa has suffered a number of set-backs. Morale among its staff is low. Its public standing has been dented, its credibility undermined. Its leadership needs bolstering and the organisation has to win back public respect for the way it operates through a fundamental process of reform. This surely does not mean, however, that the work of Mepa must cease until the reform is undertaken and wrapped up. This is a process that will take time to implement. Considerable thought - and public consultation - is also needed if the right kind of reform is to be achieved.

If Mepa's crucial position as Malta's only bulwark against land abuse is to be strengthened, not weakened, there is now an urgent need to ensure a clear firewall is built between the government of the day and the authority. Public perception is all-important. While the government must be in a position to lay down the broad environmental and development strategy to be followed, it must adopt a hands-off approach where specific planning decisions are concerned and, in-so-far as possible, in the final selection of the key planning boards and commissions.

This has now become a pressing issue. The Prime Minister's reform of Mepa should, therefore, focus on three inter-locking areas: Mepa's structure; the composition and selection of its boards and commissions; and the adoption of systems and procedures designed to achieve greater transparency, effectiveness and accountability in protecting the environment.

Those selected to serve on the boards and commissions should reflect more closely the different components of civil society whose concerns they are there to represent. The real or perceived conflicts of interest that occasionally appear to exist must in future be avoided. Members of boards and commissions should comprise people selected for their personal qualities and probity, as well as their technical competence. Above all, perhaps, their selection should be made subject to independent scrutiny before acceptance for service on the boards or commissions. Only in this way, and through a stringent tightening of Mepa's operational procedures, will public confidence in its ability to safeguard the environment be restored.