Within a space of a fortnight, Environment Minister José Herrera has twice expressed his disagreement with planning permits granted for new development in Gozo. The first permit was for the extension of the restaurant in Dwejra. 

Last week, the Planning Authority took steps to overrule objections to the granting of a permit for a house in an open, scenic area outside the village of Qala. This second permit is not yet fully sealed, with the decision now deferred until August 6.

The sensitivity of the landscape near the inland sea at Dwejra is obvious. But the site at Qala is also in a very sensitive rural location, in the area known as Tal-Muxi. This is designated as an ‘Area of High Landscape Value’.  

The Environment and Resources Authority has stated that this proposed development “would significantly intrude into the pleasant and particularly panoramic view” at Tal-Muxi. ERA has strongly objected to the proposal, rightly stating that this type of development should be confined to built-up areas.

The proposal involves a small dilapidated rural building, which will be expanded into a larger house with swimming pool. This will completely change the style and context of this old vernacular structure. 

The existing building has been roofless and abandoned since before 1978. It may have been used as a dwelling at some point in the past but, to their credit, the planning officers at the PA are reluctant to accept that this should be accepted as an excuse to create a new and significantly larger residence. 

But the Planning Commission appears to think otherwise. It may, of course, be keeping its eyes on the letter of the policy, which allows certain rural structures to be rehabilitated. This is the Rural Policy and Design Guidance of 2014, whose drafting was led by the chairman of this same Commission, Elizabeth Ellul.

At the time it was stated that its aim was to revise existing policies and “to learn from existing policy flaws which could have a significant effect on the environment.” This aim has clearly not been fully achieved. As this proposal at Qala shows, at least one major policy flaw still exists.

There is no point in the minister saying that the granting of this application is “not on”, if he and his Cabinet colleagues are not prepared to take action to rectify this flaw and to ensure that such situations are not allowed to happen again. 

In the case of Dwejra, the Environment and Resources Authority has been constrained to initiate legal action in court, to try to overturn the planning permit. Will ERA end up having to take legal steps on the Qala decision too?

All this would be unnecessary if only ERA were given a stronger voice in planning decisions in the first place. ERA’s opinion must carry weight and should not be easily overruled by board members and planners who appear to have very little sensitivity towards the environment.

What is stopping the government from revisiting and amending the rural policy? That is where the solution lies, not in lengthy, costly and cumbersome appeals by the environment or heritage regulators, desperately trying to limit the damage being done by the Planning Authority.

Just as the fuel stations policy has enabled the excessive building of ODZ petrol stations, the rural policy is enabling the destruction of the countryside though loopholes like this. And just as the fuel stations policy requires revision, so does the rural policy.

Minister, you hold the power to take action, by providing the right foundations and policy context for good decisions to be taken.