Kamra tal-Periti ‘never presented’ with proposal to reform entire planning system

The Kamra tal-Periti (KTP), Malta’s professional body for architects and civil engineers, has expressed serious reservations about one of the two planning reform Bills tabled by the Government last Friday.

In a detailed statement issued on Tuesday (today), the Council confirmed that it was “never presented” with the text of Bill 143 – which proposes amendments to the Development Planning Act – and only had the opportunity to review the bill in the past three days.

This stands in contrast to its involvement in discussions around Bill 144, which amends the Environment and Planning Review Tribunal (EPRT) Act. On this front, the KTP acknowledged it had been consulted and confirmed that “most of its recommendations were included in the final Bill.” However, it pointed out that “a number of provisions found therein were not previously discussed.”

While welcoming some overdue changes to the appeals process – particularly the suspension of permits during an appeal, which the KTP described as a “preposterous” oversight that needed urgent correction – the professional body flagged key concerns with other aspects of the proposals.

Concerns over public participation and strategic direction

The Council took particular issue with what it described as an uncoordinated, short-sighted approach to planning reform. It warned that “piecemeal revisions and the absence of broad public participation in decisions affecting the well-being of this country and its citizens is not the correct approach.”

The KTP reiterated its long-standing call for a formal, root-and-branch overhaul of Malta’s planning regime, underpinned by “contemporary and sustainable planning paradigms.” It said the public’s growing dissatisfaction with the planning system stems from decades of gradual decay in Malta’s built environment and quality of life, compounded by recent construction incidents.

This “makes the need for deep and meaningful reform not only more pressing, but inescapable,” the Council stated.

It argued that reforms must be guided by long-term strategy rather than short-term fixes, noting the lack of alignment with broader national policies such as the long-overdue Strategic Plan for Environment & Development (SPED), which was due for review in 2020.

KTP offers to lead formal reform process

Positioning itself as a trusted and impartial stakeholder, the KTP said it is ready to “step up and lead the process,” much as it has already been entrusted to do with Malta’s construction regulation reform through its agreement with the Building and Construction Authority.

“The Council believes it is in a privileged position to take on this role, given the broad confidence and trust of opposing and varying interests it enjoys,” it said.

In the past weeks, the KTP had also been in regular discussions with the Planning Authority on developing a National Architecture Policy to address strategic issues in the field. It noted that these discussions are now at an advanced stage, with a detailed announcement expected soon.

Technical analysis reveals inaccuracies and flaws

In its statement, the KTP explained that it had undertaken a full technical review of both Bills. These findings have been compiled into two detailed analysis reports containing comments, recommendations, and – in some cases – proposals for the amendment or outright deletion of specific articles.

The KTP also pushed back against what it described as “incorrect misinterpretations of the content of the Bills” circulating in the media. Specifically, it clarified that it is “incorrect to state that only objections filed within the 30-day representation window will be considered.”

According to the KTP , “The actual text is exceedingly clear that objections can be changed and extended until the two-week deadline to respond to the case officer’s report. Moreover, objectors are given the right to file further submissions if any plans are changed at the request of the Planning Board.”

Nonetheless, it expressed “objectionable” concern over certain aspects of Bill 143, particularly regarding changes to the hierarchy of planning documents and provisions allowing for policy modification. While it recognised that Malta’s current planning documents are “poorly crafted and grossly outdated,” the KTP stressed that the path forward should be “a formal process for deep and meaningful planning reform.”

Government feedback welcomed – but more is expected

The Council closed its statement by welcoming Prime Minister Robert Abela’s public remarks indicating that the Government would consider feedback on the proposed legislation. It added that it “trusts that the amendments put forward by the KTP tal-Periti will be considered and adopted.”

As criticism of the proposed laws continues to mount – with opposition parties, NGOs, and professional bodies alike calling for their withdrawal or revision – the KTP’s intervention adds a technical and measured voice.