MP insists on full publication of medical equipment contract

Opposition health spokesman Michael Farrugia yesterday insisted that the government should publish the appendices of the medical agreement contract signed between the Foundation for Medical Services and suppliers INSO, saying its refusal to do so implied it had something to hide.

Dr Farrugia was speaking in parliament during the debate on the new Mater Dei Hospital.

Dr Farrugia went over the way the hospital project had evolved over the years. He said the hospital as originally conceived by the Nationalist government, without consultations, had been harshly criticised by all experts because it would have split hospital services.

The Labour government in 1996, after consultations, decided that the project should be extended so that it would be an acute general and teaching hospital.

The Labour government had decided that while responsibility for the original project footprint would remain in the hands of the existing contractor, all the other construction works were to be allocated after a call for tenders. But in 2000 the Nationalist government reached a new agreement with Skanska to design, build and manage the whole hospital project.

That same contract had been offered to the Labour government but it rejected it as it effectively meant transferring all control to the contractor.

In terms of that agreement, the hospital was to cost Lm83 million excluding value added tax. There were specific dates when 15 different sections had to start operating with a target value for each section. There was also provision for penalties in case completion of each section was delayed. The contract terms were such that payments had to be made in advance.

The hospital was to have become government property in 2005.

That deal had been harshly criticised by the opposition and time had proved the opposition right.

But what had been done as the costs of the hospital rose? Had the Foundation for Medical Services informed the minister? It seemed the government had been informed. So who was to shoulder political responsibility?

Dr Farrugia said that last February he had asked Health Minister Louis Deguara for an estimate of how much the hospital would cost. The minister said it was to be Lm82 million with variations of about Lm5 million. In all, the sum had gone up to Lm177 million. It was clear that the value was to go up to at least Lm216 million.

What action was the government to take regarding things which should have been done and which had been noted in Jackie Camilleri's Gap report but which were not?

What responsibilities would the cost controllers carry?

Dr Farrugia said that even though the government had been advised that it should only pay a maximum of Lm135 million, it had agreed to pay Lm139 million for the building, an additional Lm4 million even as the health sector was starved of funds.

Dr Farrugia asked what the government was hiding regarding the medical equipment contract. Why was the government insisting on not publishing the appendices. He also called on the government to list the tenderers and their offer.

Adrian Vassallo (MLP) said the government claimed it had a vision for the future when it conceived the hospital, yet as originally planned the hospital was half baked as it would only have included some medical disciplines, splitting hospital services with St Luke's and causing confusion. The Labour government in 1996 rightly decided that the new hospital should be enlarged to provide all services. Therefore, it was the Labour government which had had a vision for the future. The new Nationalist government in1998 confirmed the Labour view but mishandled the project management, assigning all responsibilities to Skanska. With time, cost overruns and delays grew and the hospital became shrouded in a lack of transparency.

The government claimed after the recent talks with Skanska that it would save Lm25 million on completion costs. But how would a planned five storey building to host the Medical School and the Institute of Health Care, as well as the facilities for the renal unit, psychiatry, dental and cancer care and skin diseases suddenly find themselves in the existing building instead of new blocks as planned? Was the prime minister Harry Potter? Would these facilities be crammed into a small space or had the building been so badly planned that there was cavernous extra space?