Unfortunately, Din l-Art Ħelwa (DLĦ) has got into the habit of trying to run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. Even the title of Martin Galea's Talking Point (December 31), Sound Planning Decisions, is on that slippery slope, as ostensibly its content is hostile to "unsound" planning decisions.
As mentioned by Mr Galea himself, an inquiry on Mepa actions carried out by Mepa board members does not make for independence of view. But in any case, the "credit" supposedly due to Mepa for having "published the full results of [the] inquiry" is non-existent. We have signed the Aarhus Convention; publication of the results of such inquiries is our due.
Acting as both gamekeeper and poacher is fast becoming standard Mepa practice. The auditor has pointed out that Mepa regulations stipulate that the Mepa board chairman cannot be an employee of Mepa. Yet, Austin Walker is both chairman and CEO of Mepa.
And from that position akin to the colossus of Rhodes, Chairman Walker comments on auditor reports which deal with Mepa actions for which final responsibility lies with CEO Walker. Is this going to be a feature of the ever-forthcoming Mepa reform?
As for what Mr Galea calls a "damning statement" of planning officer conduct by the inquiry board - that had astonishingly light consequences: the planning officers were told not to do it again, tantamount to a very gentle slap on the wrist - the really damning statements, made by the auditor, were not considered by the inquiry board nor mentioned by Mr Galea.
These related to possible discrimination against an applicant, in connection with which the auditor recommended a police investigation; and to inexplicable changes of position by the director of agriculture.
One final point: Mr Galea might like to look at another auditor report on another small part of DLĦ, that on the Ta' Baldu site. In this case there are no "sound planning decisions" and "damning statements" come thick and fast; the auditor even asks that "The Mepa should request the Prime Minister to consider appointing a formal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the operations of the Development Control Commission Division A".
The applicant's architect and almost inevitably the Director of Agriculture feature as other villains of the piece, together with the applicant and with Mepa enforcement officers, who in a welter of irregularities, saw no evil, heard no evil, and objected not at all. What all this forebodes for Mepa reform is anybody's guess.