‘Opposition’s motion not substantiated’

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi told Parliament yesterday that MPs had to vote against the opposition’s motion because its claims were not substantiated by the Auditor General’s findings.

Parliament had to show respect for the auditor’s recommendations and address the administrative shortcomings. And the government would do its utmost to moot out the environmental impact while converting to natural gas technology when the country had the necessary infrastructure.

The opposition’s claims were identical to those raised by one of BWSC’s rival bidders, Bateman. In his report, the auditor had said that Bateman’s complaints had been meticulously analysed by his technical and legal experts and they had not found any justification in Bateman’s claims except for one instance – they had not been notified in writing that they had placed last in the tender process.

Dr Gonzi asked whether this would have annulled the tendering process and whether the government had not done the best for the country.

He criticised the opposition for failing to refer to the auditor’s report in their speeches when both sides had agreed that the Auditor General had to investigate the allegations presented before the Public Accounts Committee. The investigation, the longest and most complex in the NAO’s history, had taken 11 months.

Dr Gonzi said that the country needed to think of energy development although it was not easy to find a balance between energy requirements and environmental sensitivity. Both sides had to agree that one needed solutions to meet energy needs within five and 10 years’ time.

One also had to consider the financial burden that such solutions would place on families and industry, and that the government should do everything to soften the negative impact on the environment.

The auditor had said that the terms of reference of the tender process required that the choice be made so that the country could acquire the best technology on the market with the lowest cost of operations while meeting environmental and legal requirements. The government had had to decide according to the tender parameters and in the country’s best interests, not on suspicions.

Dr Gonzi asked whether the opposition agreed that the Marsa power station should close down by 2012, failing which Malta would be subjected to heavy EU fines. Did it agree that this energy should be generated from the Delimara power station extension until Malta had the interconnector with Italy and the infrastructure for converting to natural gas? This was a costly exercise.

He declared that if anyone had any suspicion and wanted further verification, the necessary mechanisms would be put in motion. He said that Evarist Bartolo (PL) could refer to the competent authorities.

Dr Gonzi also declared that if there was any anonymous report, he would ask the competent authorities to investigate. But one could not hold a people’s court and there had to be free processes. He accused the opposition of trying to influence the auditor in his investigation when it had requested the debate in September when the auditor’s report was not ready.

In his report, the Auditor General had not found any irregularity in the tender process. He had found the financial regulations were followed and that Mr David Spiteri Gingell was not involved in any corruption. Mr Spiteri Gingell himself had requested the Auditor General to investigate him in connection with the case. The Auditor General had been assisted by technical and legal experts in the investigation.

Contrary to Bateman’s accusations that the government had changed the legal notice and had created unfair competition, the auditor had found that the legal notice had to be changed to meet the requirements of EU directives. Enemalta Corporation had been trying to amend the legal notices since 2005.

Also contrary to Bateman’s assumptions, the auditor’s technical experts had found that the turbine using diesel had a higher maintenance cost than one using heavy fuel oil.

The costing exercise was comprehensive and no cost – except for overheads – had been overlooked. The footprint would not jeopardise the third phase in the extension of the power station.

The auditor had also confirmed that the BWSC tender complied with the fuel requirement as one which could use two fuel systems. He had also confirmed that using any kind of calculations possible Bateman’s tender would still place third in the process.