Labour MP's claims over IT courses 'illegal, unethical'

Minister Austin Gatt was unaware of a call for tenders for the provision of ICT diploma courses to be offered by the Infrastructure, Transport and Communications Ministry let alone having been involved in any stage of the selection process, the ministry said.

He was replying to Labour spokesman Evarist Bartolo's allegations that the company selected enjoyed his trust, a claim the ministry described as "dishonest".

The ministry said Dr Gatt had sought legal advice on whether he could sue Mr Bartolo for libel.

The Labour Party was trying to taint the process when the contract to run the courses, to be called the Second Step Training Programme, had not yet even been awarded, it charged.

"Mr Bartolo's action is illegal and unethical because the tendering process is regulated by law and everyone who thinks this was not observed has the right to appeal.

"Mr Bartolo took the role of prosecutor, juror and the Court of Appeal, a position which certainly does not suit him," the ministry said.

In another statement, Mr Bartolo yesterday reiterated his allegation, claiming the first two phases of the process for the €700,000 contract were already tainted.

He called for the process to be stopped and investigated because companies that should have already been disqualified in the first two phases had qualified even though they broke contract conditions. "The companies should have been disqualified because they are not capable of offering the three different courses asked for," Mr Bartolo said.

Later in the day, the ministry said it was curious how, when none of the applicants appealed, Mr Bartolo interfered in a public and legal process.

"The logical conclusion of this uncalled for interference, which is unethical, is that Mr Bartolo expects that because he is an MP he has the right to interfere, change or influence a transparent tendering process," it continued.

"In very simple terms, Mr Bartolo, who knows that the technical capability of all applications is being evaluated, is consciously using his public pulpit to put pressure on whoever has to make the evaluation and, therefore, try to manoeuvre the awarding of the tender to whom he wants."