Minister denies claims

The Opposition yesterday gave notice of a motion in Parliament demanding the resignation of Investments Minister Austin Gatt over comments which it said the minister made during the House sitting of May 30.

The minister in a prompt reaction denied having made the comments which the opposition attributed to him and published the transcript of the debate to back his position.

Opposition deputy leader Charles Mangion and whip Joe Mizzi in their motion said that on May 30 Dr Gatt "in an arrogant manner admitted" that owing to a lack of observance of the law, and in view of its five-seat majority in the House, the government could violate the law but may retroactively rectify any such violation of laws and regulations.

The opposition was referring to comments by Dr Gatt over the government's sale of its shares in Maltacom. He had said that a large undeveloped area belonging to Maltacom was to revert to the government, but the company would in return be given ownership of the sites where telephone exchanges had been built. He had said this process needed approval by the House, but the government could make commitments because of its majority.

Dr Mangion and Mr Mizzi said Dr Gatt's admission that the law had not been observed constituted blatant abuse of power which was unacceptable in a democracy. Such comments undermined Parliament and rendered it a rubber stamp of the government's decisions.

Such behaviour went against constitutional convention and basic democratic principles and insulted the people, who felt that the House should be respected by all its members and protected by the government.

The motion therefore urges the House to condemn Dr Gatt's behaviour and calls on the Prime Minister to condemn Dr Gatt's comments and reaffirm the government's respect to the House.

It calls on Dr Gatt to shoulder his political responsibility by stepping down and urges all MPs to confirm their loyalty to the House.

In a reaction to the opposition statement, Dr Gatt published the official text of what he had said in Parliament.

He stressed that he had never admitted that any law had been broken or that there had been any action which had somehow violated or twisted regulations on the transfer of public property.

The agreement with Tecom Investments on the sale of Maltacom shares clearly provided that within six months the governemnt has to seek parliamentary approval for the transfer of public property as laid down in the law.

These, Dr Gatt said, were plain facts which contradicted the premise of the opposition's motion.