The EU agricultural funds paying agency signed a contract with a beneficiary for €150,000 four days before the 2013 general election even though he did not have the full permit to initiate the project, The Sunday Times of Malta has learnt.
The amount granted to Stephen Galea is the maximum permissible under so-called Measure 123, intended to “add value to agricultural products”. The applicant was granted the funds based only on an outline permit for a winery in Bidnija.
The paying agency’s ranking report in September 2012 showed Mr Galea had qualified for the funds. Less than a month later, the Rural Affairs Ministry extended the timeframe within which applicants could acquire the necessary permits from Mepa.
Mr Galea’s permit application faced strong opposition from residents, so much so that Mepa hearings on the subject were featured in the media. Last May, the permit “to construct a winery below street level” was turned down, although Mr Galea filed a fresh appeal. Mr Galea said he was the recipient of the funds and confirmed the contract was signed on March 5, 2013, based on an outline permit.
“In Austin Walker’s time, the former Mepa chairman, an outline permit was as good as a [development] permit,” Mr Galea said, referring to other cases where full development permission was granted based on an outline permit.
I think I have an appointment next week to cancel the contract
When this newspaper pointed out that Mepa records showed he still did not have the necessary permit to proceed with the project, he said he had cancelled the contract.
Yet the contract remains valid and the funds are still allocated to Stephen Galea, according to the paying agency. When this was put to Mr Galea, he said: “I think I have an appointment next week to cancel the contract.”
He said he was going to revoke the contract because he would not be able to finish the project in time due to delays related to the permit.
“If I don’t revoke the contract, I won’t have the opportunity to apply for funds again... I already obtained other funds under different measures,” Mr Galea said.
The paying agency has been asked to compile a report to be presented to the Internal Audit and Investigation Department of the European Commission following revelations by Times of Malta on agricultural fund allocations, according to the Commission.
Several beneficiaries of EU funds were twice allocated the maximum funding allowed under different streams. Farmers complained to Times of Malta that they were denied funding granted to others whose projects did not meet the eligibility criteria.
EU auditors lambasted the agricultural paying agency in 2010, saying it was not up to standard. It found examples of insufficient audit trails, miscalculations of aid eligible to farmers and payments made before anomalies were solved.
cmuscat@timesofmalta.com