Labour to contest Gatt’s presence on PAC

The House Public Accounts Committee adjourned yesterday after the government side refuted the opposition’s call for Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt to step aside while witnesses were heard in the committee’s investigation of the Delimara power station extension contract.

Evarist Bartolo said the opposition would present a formal motion in a plenary session of the House to remove Dr Gatt from the committee for this case only.

At the start of the sitting, committee chairman Charles Mangion (PL) said Mr Bartolo had confirmed that the bank mentioned in the previous sitting was Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, not Sumimoto.

Auditor General Anthony Mifsud explained that, while his Office could investigate any activity falling under the Maltese public sector, there were technical, legal and juridical limitations to what it could investigate internationally. Problems exist­ed even in investigations of the local private sector.

After Dr Gatt said the government side would not object to the list of witnesses to be called, as proposed by Mr Bartolo, Dr Mangion said there was no need to put the motion to the vote.

As for the second motion, Dr Gatt said if the opposition side thought its vote could remove a minister from the performance of his duties on the committee, the concept was inexistent in parliamentary procedure. Even in a case of conflict of interest, the MP involved must declare it but was still entitled to vote in the debate thereon.

He was ready to ask Mr Speaker to rule the opposition’s motion ultra vires. Mr Bartolo said the opposition was not acting capriciously, and would have preferred for good sense to prevail because of Dr Gatt’s ministerial involvement in the BWSC saga. It was an anomaly for any member of the executive to be present on a parliamentary committee scrutinising the executive.

Dr Gatt should be sitting in front of the committee answering its questions because his first loyalty should be to the taxpayer and to accountability.

Dr Gatt pointed out that Mr Bartolo himself, the prime “prosecutor” of BWSC, was a member of the PAC, having substituted Alfred Sant.

Helena Dalli (PL) said if Mr Bartolo had not been a member of the PAC, the opposition would still have asked for him to be nominated as substitute on the committee.

Finance Minister Tonio Fenech said the PAC was not there to prosecute anybody but to scrutinise. There were no formal charges against anyone, but things the House wanted to clear up. It was also normal practice for the Minister of Finance to be on the committee.

Dr Gatt said that even if a minister was made the subject of a motion of no confidence, he still took part in the debate. The composition of the committee could not be changed.

Adjourning the PAC meeting in view of the circumstances, Dr Mangion urged the House Business Committee to expedite its decision on the calling of witnesses.