Watch: Minister plans to scale back planning reform after outcry

Planning Minister Clint Camilleri has pledged to roll back some key elements of the recent planning reform, after the quietly introduced changes triggered widespread anger just weeks ago.

Most significantly, he said he plans to withdraw a contentious clause in Bill 143 that would have given the Planning Authority (PA) the power to deviate from existing planning laws and policies.

The clause has been a focal point of criticism, with opponents arguing it would grant the PA unlimited power and make it nearly impossible for citizens to appeal decisions.

“It was well-intentioned. We wanted to give the PA power to deviate from rules to better safeguard context,” Camilleri said during an interview on Times Talk.

“For instance, if a local plan permits a five-storey building in an area where it doesn’t fit, we wanted the PA to be able to cap the height at two storeys, for example.”

“This power could also work in reverse: if a shallow plot is surrounded by high-rises, the PA could allow a taller building to fill the gap. Another reason was to allow the PA to approve well-designed, modern buildings that blend artistically with older structures, a sight you often see in major cities abroad,” he said.

However, the minister said that after speaking with activists and NGOs over the past weeks, he now believes their concerns are correct.

They pointed out that giving the PA this power would make it very difficult for the public to appeal permits that are not in the public interest.

“I had not considered this implication. Our intentions were good, but I don’t want this law to obstruct the right to appeal or create a situation where appeals are impossible.

“The clause should be completely eliminated. Despite our good intentions, the activists and NGOs are right. The government can still achieve the same goal by drafting new policies on aesthetics and context, which would allow the PA to make decisions based on improved principles.”

Planning a hot summer

The government tabled two planning bills in parliament last month and will issue a legal notice in what came to be a highly controversial planning reform in the midst of summer.

One of the bills overhauls the appeals process for development applications. The second bill gives the PA and the planning minister new powers, and the legal notice will allow illegalities in ODZ to be sanctioned.

Only the first of those three was expected. Environmentalists say they are a capitulation to big developers, but developers say they are no walkover, and the government has since said they were fair laws but was open to the public’s feedback.

In an interview on Times Talk this week, Camilleri said listening to people opened his eyes to some activists’ perspectives he had not yet considered.

The minister said he is also prepared to reverse the proposal to narrow the appeals period from 30 to 20 days. The change was only meant to expedite the appeals process for all, he said.

Activists had complained this window was too narrow to allow them enough time to prepare and file a well-researched appeal.

Clause to raise permits from the dead… is dead

Two other clauses that raised activists’ eyebrows would have given Camilleri and anyone who succeeded him as planning minister the power to issue new planning regulations without public consultation and to revive old, expired permits.

Camilleri now says he is removing both.

 

He said the clause to revive expired permits was intended to help developers whose projects were stalled by unforeseen circumstances, like the pandemic, but acknowledged it could be misinterpreted to allow permits from decades ago to be revived.

“Some people thought – and this hadn’t even crossed my mind – that I would resurrect some permit from the 70s or 80s. It was not about that at all. It took me four days to realise why this clause was raising so many eyebrows,” he said.

“So, we’d better eliminate the clause, for everyone’s peace of mind.”

‘Court won’t be powerless’

Camilleri defended the rest of the reform and maintained it was necessary.

He rejected criticism that the bills give the PA unlimited power and render the courts powerless, explaining that if a court finds an irregularity in a permit, it will refer the case back to the planning tribunal, which is legally bound to enforce the court’s decision.

Critics called out a clause that would remove the court’s power to annul permits. The clause says that if it finds that part of a permit, or the full permit, was granted illegally, the court can only send it back to the planning tribunal for a legal review. Activists said this was stripping the system of a vital checks and balances.

But Camilleri said the planning tribunal and the developer will still have no option but to adhere to the court’s decision.

“The court will still have had the final say, but it will give the developer the chance to fix it,” he said, adding that this process prevents the court from having to scrap an entire project if only a small part of it is illegal.

“I’m trying to take the bull by the horns here”- Minister

“The tribunal and the developer will either have to adhere to the court’s decision or scrap the project altogether, but the permit won’t be issued against the court’s decision.”

Another clause in the appeals bill doubles the fines for anyone found to have objected frivolously to a development – another clause activists fear is meant to deter them from taking it up against developers.

Camilleri stressed this measure is not aimed at NGOs.

“Environmental NGOs never file frivolous appeals. In fact, their appeals are always extremely detailed and studied and they win quite a few cases. It’s aimed at people who want to stall developers simply because they are envious of them.”

ODZ and height limitations

Another contentious clause grants the PA the power to alter zoning designations, including height limitations and land use. Critics fear this could allow the PA to permit construction in ODZs and allow the PA to raise or lower building heights unconditionally and without limits in essentially all building zones, including the village core.

Camilleri insisted this is not the case. He said the clause only applies to areas that are already zoned. He said most ODZ land is not zoned and will remain untouched. The clause is intended to allow for the rezoning of specific areas, such as industrial zones into commercial or residential ones.

Camilleri defended the change, saying it gives private citizens the ability to apply for rezoning themselves, removing the need for a minister to propose it through parliament.

But he added that the government is still in the process of listening to public feedback on the matter and is open to more change if necessary.

The minister also addressed concerns that the PA could arbitrarily increase height limitations, for example, changing a five-storey zone to 10 storeys. While the PA could technically allow such a change, it would not necessarily be approved, he said.

Blessing illegalities?

The reform will allow people to pay hefty fines to be able to keep their illegal structures on ODZ land.

Camilleri said he believes the “excessive fines” are fair and would be a deterrent for future illegal development. He added that the government would have no choice but to use excavators to pull down illegal structures after the regularisation period elapses.

“In the past 30 years there were enforcements on some 6,500 illegalities, only 1,500 of which were resolved. With what we still have pending now, it will take us another 100 years to resolve the rest,” he said.

“The solution must be realistic and one that draws a line. We’re drawing that line going forward. I’m trying to take the bull by the horns here.”

He said fines for illegal structures will no longer be capped, aiming for an extreme deterrent against future illegal construction.

Despite our good intentions, the activists and NGOs are right

He said the only “realistic solution” is to allow existing illegal structures to be regularised by paying “excessive” but fair fines. He believes these fines reflect the fair market price, especially for those who profited from their illegal builds.

However, the government is considering slightly lowering the fines for farmers with illegal agricultural structures, he added.

Camilleri conceded that Bill 143 came unexpectedly but defended the way the regularisation scheme was hidden from the public, saying that announcing it too early could have encouraged people to erect new illegal structures in time to benefit from the new scheme.

He admitted the government should have held a press briefing to explain the reforms before tabling the bills in parliament, acknowledging some fellow ministers held the same view.

“This bill is coming from a good place. Our intentions are good,” he said.

Subscribe to Times Talk on Spotify or Apple Podcasts to make sure you don’t miss the next episode.