Former parliamentary secretary for Lands Michael Falzon this evening expressed his frustration over the whole Gaffarena scandal which led to his resignation from Cabinet last January following a controversial €1.65 million expropriation deal for a Valletta property.

“I am fed up with this story, it has been going on for 10 months,” Dr Falzon told the public accounts committee.

He continued to insist that the Auditor General’s report was a “political witch hunt”.

The Auditor General had found irregularities and the prime minister had launched court proceedings to annul the deal.

Dr Falzon said it is impossible for politicians to examine all the expropriation deals that passes under their hands.

He fended off accusations that a 23-year-old member of his secretariat Clint Scerri was the link between himself and the Lands Department.

Last week, the former director of the Government Estate Management Division, Carmel Camilleri, told the public accounts committee he had been placed under pressure to get the process completed quickly.

I am fed up with this story, it has been going on for 10 months

Mr Camilleri issued a sworn statement in which he said that he acted under pressure from a Mr Scerri.

“I did not give any instructions to a 22 or 23-year old on scale 14 or scale 15 to act in my name. I did not tell any top officials in the Lands Department that he was speaking in my name,” Dr Falzon said.

He tore into the report's failure to look into the role of Joseph Spiteri, the architect who valued the property that was subsequently expropriated.

“Why is his name completely missing from the NAO’s report?” he asks. “That is the big question here."

Auditor General Charles Deguara countered Dr Falzon’s accusations of political motives in the NAO’s report.

“I can assure you there were no political motives or agendas. I would like to put his [Dr Falzon’s] mind at rest that there was no political witch hunt. If there is any proof then I will shoulder responsibility for it,” Mr Deguara said.

“Let us not lie,” Dr Falzon said in response, though making it clear that he was not referring to Mr Deguara who he said he had the "utmost respect for".

Dr Falzon insisted he had nothing to do with the property's valuation, nor did he ever question it. "Why would I get involved? That's why I have civil servants and experts whose job it is to make such valuations." 

Labour MP Charles Mangion leapt to his PL colleague's defence, saying that he would have come under even further scrutiny had he ordered a new valuation. 

"Damned if you do, damned if you don't," Dr Falzon agreed. 

Mr Deguara said it was "clear" there was some form of collusion between Mr Gaffarena and the GPD.  

Dr Falzon asked Mr Deguara to verify whether he had held a meeting with him and the then Auditor General – before the controversy had even broked – to warn him about political interference in his office.

“Yes, you gave us your opinion,” Mr Deguara replied. 

On a question from Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, NAO officials confirmed that it was in the process of investigating another valuation issued by the same architect, Joseph Spiteri. 

An angry Dr Falzon accused the NAO of being a Times of Malta "back office". The Times of Malta had published news of the report in question, with Dr Falzon subsequently claiming it had been "leaked". 

That prompted an indignant Mr Deguara to say he was willing to take an oath stating that he had nothing to do with the leak.

Parliamentary Speaker Anglu Farrugia had subsequently found no evidence of any leaks. 

Dr Falzon argued that if politicians were to assume the hands-on role in expropriation cases that the NAO had called for, "nobody would ever sign an expropriation agreement." 

"In 99.9 per cent of cases, the public purpose behind the expropriation would be determined by the relevant ministry," Mr Fenech countered. 

Mr Mangion ticked off the NAO for what he said was its failure to spell out the fine details in its report's executive summary. "Most people don't read beyond that, and when a person reads of 'collusion' their thought immediately leaps to the politician in question," he said. 

Dr Falzon also said the NAO ought to have included a disclaimer in its report, making it clear that the architect in question, Mr Spiteri, had done work for the NAO in the past. 

Mr Deguara said he had been unaware of the fact before it was brought to his attention. He also said the NAO had been critical of Mr Spiteri - so critical that the architect had written to them in protest. 

"We're sandwiched," Mr Deguara said.

"So are politicians," Dr Falzon shot back.