Manwel Dimech Bridge fraud investigation still pending
The main thoroughfare of Manwel Dimech bridge was reopened to traffic in April 2008, €2.3 million over budget. Photo: Matthew Mirabelli
The police investigation into suspected fraud in the certification of the Manwel Dimech Bridge has still not been concluded, 18 months after the probe was ordered, The Sunday Times has learnt.
Transport Minister Austin Gatt had ordered the investigation after learning that fraud could have taken place in the certification of work on the bridge soon after it was completed.
The suspicion arose when architect Robert Sant, whose consortium had been tasked with supervising the certification of the works on the bridge, realised that incorrect information and technical data works had been submitted by the contractors' foreign engineer with regard to the bridge's post-tension operations.
Mr Sant had flagged an e-mail sent by the Portuguese engineer responsible for certifying the bridge to his boss, the leading Italian contractor in the consortium entrusted with the civil works.
The e-mail states, in Italian: "The project manager is requesting the tensioning of cables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.1 and 6.1 to 105 per cent. As agreed on the phone, I will pretend that I tensioned the cables during the Easter period (the supervisor is not at the site on these days) and will change the values a bit."
Despite the suspected abuse, the authorities insisted the bridge was safe although maintenance costs may rise.
The Manwel Dimech Bridge project was fraught with controversy because of delays. The €6 million job started in September 2006 and was originally expected to be completed within a year but the work took much longer than expected.
The main thoroughfare was reopened to traffic in April 2008, €2.3 million over budget.
In May last year, the Malta Transport Authority wrote to the Italian contractors entrusted with the bridge reconstruc-tion project, informing them that they had been fined over €620,700 for completing the job almost nine months behind schedule.
No other announcement had been made on the fine, or on whether this had been paid.
But in January, in a reply to a parliamentary question, Dr Gatt said talks were being held between the ADT and the contractor responsible on penalties for late completion of the project.
He said he could not table the project implementation report before talks aimed at averting legal action were held with the contractors.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
R.Gauci
Mar 8th 2010, 11:29
I am understanding WELL here? So the project cost 2.3 millions Euros more over the stipulated budget and its not 100% up to standard to the tender requirements cause the maintenance cost will arise then those original stated Right?
Aren't both of these circumstances a breach of the stipulated contract or tender and if not so why bother to issue any of them anymore??
So lets say the contractor is going to pay or paid ( cause we don't know) the fine of 620,700 euros for late completing of the project the tax payer will still had forked out 1,679,300 euros more plus the extra cost for the maintenance which till now after 2 years the bridge was re -opened we don't know how much will be!!
Can some expert enlighten us about this matter and who is going to be responsable for all this ?! Normally there are a lot out there!
So someone who was labelled on Billboards to make " Qassati" was right after all !!
A. Mifsud
Mar 8th 2010, 09:03
So what will happen should the contractor be found guilty or irregularities? Will he be held responsible to damages or will he be held liable for the eventual increased maintenance costs that the tax payer would otherwise have to incur?
Well judjng by the way things happen in this ill managed country no or very little action will be taken. Perhaps the contractor will get a fine of a few hundreds euros (at the most) only to recoup that fine exponantially with his next multi million euro contract awarded!!
And letr's not forget that the contractor pocketed an additional EUR 2.3 million for "unforseen circumstances" that pushed the project s' cost over its allocated budgets!!!
Shame on the ADT and the ministry responsible!
laurence schembri
Mar 8th 2010, 08:32
@ john smith
Brainwashed? You are right on one thing though,had the bridge was left to collapse, it would have been safer, quicker and cheaper to re-build,further more there would have been no need for an investigation on fraud. Get a brain and then we will see who is brainwashed.
Joe Smith
Mar 8th 2010, 00:37
It seems like what ever happens recently, its Gonzi that gets the blame for everything. For all the people that commented and said that its Gonzi's fault can you please tell me what MLP would have done better. Probably they wouldn't have even reconstructed the bridge till it collapsed........PLEASE stop being so brainwashed
Anthony Pace Gouder
Mar 7th 2010, 20:50
So what EXACTLY was the real cost of this Reconstruction Project ? SIX or EIGHT million three hundred thousand Euro minus the FINE ?
When considering that this Project involved Demolition of the old bridge c . 150m x 24m, Reconstruction ,working at a maximum height of 6 to 7 floors above the Valley ,traffic management and all the Road Finishes and embellishment , the estimated sum of 6,000.000 Euro, was remarkably LOW not to say CHEAP ! This project was commissioned and completed under J. Mugliett's Ministry .
Now can anyone please explain how the proposed Breakwater Bridge in "simple"(as termed by the ministry) structural steelwork not even half this Bridge's span with a 7 to 8 times narrower width , having a wooden deck in comparisson to the Deep REINFORCED Concrete of the Manwel Dimech , is estimated to cost nearly HALF the cost of THIS MAJOR RECONSTRUCTION ! Another fact is that the M D Bridge plays a vital component in the Road network, taking thousands of vehicles across, the other is a bridge to nowhere ! as NO PUBLIC access beyond the bridge will be allowed.
K. Vella
Mar 7th 2010, 19:08
Is this bridge a tragic accident waiting to happen, then?
Joseph Micallef
Mar 7th 2010, 18:00
din l-ghagla kollha ghalfejn??
Anthony Grech
Mar 7th 2010, 17:54
Fraud? In Malta! Let me say that even if there a long and drawn out court case proving fraud you can pretty much be sure that noone is oing to be held to pay. The level of fraud here is pretty high so I would imagine that this would nt merit much consideration.
Anthony Mizzi
Mar 7th 2010, 17:49
Ater the Mater Dei Contract , nother Gonzipn SAGA... till the next maintenance agreement with another on Powerstation One with Powerstation Extension sequel in the pipeline........ at the Tax-Payer's expense.
Eric Gahn
Mar 7th 2010, 17:31
So is the bridge safe or when one day in the future it collapses leaving 20 dead someone will say 'Well. it was not exatcly safe but....".
This is another example of how this Govt has no control over what is going in this country.