NGOs urge BWSC debate to continue

Four environmental groups yesterday implored the Speaker of the House to allow the Public Accounts Committee to scrutinise the contract for the controversial extension of the Delimara power station.

“The Speaker is morally obliged to do everything within his power to protect public health and the state of the environment and (he) would do well to allow the PAC to endorse all mitigating measures possible that curtail air pollution,” the NGOs said.

The Malta Ramblers’ Association, Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar, Nature Trust and Friends of the Earth said that while the government might be under pressure to comply with EU deadlines, they felt such deadlines could still be met while safeguarding public health and a safe environment “which are far more important than political and economic considerations”.

Their comments come after government MPs on Monday evening blocked witnesses from being called to take part in the discussion on the award of the contract to Danish company BWSC, claiming this would undermine the Auditor General, who had already investigated the contract.

The move was labelled as a “travesty of scrutiny” by Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat and the meeting was adjourned for Speaker Michael Frendo (who is abroad), to rule on whether the committee was empowered to call witnesses in such circumstances.

Former Nationalist government minister Michael Falzon said he thought the witnesses, which the Auditor described as uncooperative in his report, would not be more forthcoming with the PAC as Labour was hoping but added that one should not object to scrutiny.

“PR-wise it is not in the government’s interest to resist this... Even if it’s a useless exercise, it shouldn’t be resisted with this force,” he said, adding that people would interpret this move as the government wanting to hide something.

When asked if he would feel undermined by the opposition’s request, the Auditor General said it was “neither ethical nor wise” to comment.

A spokesman for the Office of the Prime Minister insisted the government had been “totally transparent” throughout the whole process. The PAC had agreed to entrust the Auditor General with a detailed investigation, which was completed after 11 months and after speaking to all the necessary witnesses, he said, stressing that “repeating the whole exercise, at this stage, would imply lack of trust in the Auditor’s role as an institution, which is independent from all political influence”.

He insisted, however, the government welcomed a discussion on the Auditor’s report, which would include his participation.

However, committee chairman Charles Mangion slammed the government’s efforts to “find ways to obstruct full disclosure” despite the Prime Minister’s statements favouring full PAC scrutiny. He said the whole point of the PAC was that, unlike Parliament, it was able to call witnesses.

“If we ask questions to the Auditor General and he tells us a particular person was reluctant to answer, then we could ask the witnesses why they were so reluctant... Otherwise, we can just all have our say in Parliament but the PAC is a scrutiny committee.”

Not allowing the committee to call witnesses was like having a car but going on foot: “It’s stupid.”

Asked whether he would resign should the Speaker rule against the opposition, Dr Mangion said: “I hate jumping to conclusions and acting on hypotheses.”