Acting Speaker Ċensu Galea last night asked Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi to clarify whether a statement he had made referring to the hidden 665 Enemalta files was directed at Nationalist MPs Tonio Fenech and George Pullicino, who had raised a breach of privilege complaint over the remark.

In a ruling given after a two-hour suspension of Parliament, Mr Galea said Dr Mizzi should explain whether he was referring to personal or political responsibility when he said “you put them in a box... they were thrown away by the administration”.

This prompted both Mr Fenech and Mr Pullicino to raise their complaint.

Saying he would resume his remarks today, the minister said the previous administration had to bear political responsibility for what had happened and those who were in charge of Enemalta had to be held accountable.

The Speaker’s decision came at the end of a stormy session of Parliament that started with Dr Mizzi making a ministerial statement on the files relating to proven electricity theft, dated 2006-2011, that had been discovered stashed away in an Enemalta back room.

Dr de Marco said the Opposition did not want anyone suspended from the House but wanted to have MPs speak with honesty.

He was astonished by the Opposition members’ comments because all this had happened under their watch

Dr Mizzi said the government had every right to say that the previous government had not acted on these cases of electricity theft and his freedom of expression should not be stifled. He said his comments should be seen in the context of when they were said, including the many interruptions to his speech.

In a first reaction to Dr Mizzi’s statement, Dr de Marco said the Opposition condemned any theft of electricity and anybody who did not act to stop such theft.

However, it was wrong of Dr Mizzi to give the impression that there was some political direction to stop action against theft.

Dr de Marco asked whether the minister had investigated why no action was taken against the people mentioned in the files? Did he know whether it was a decision taken by the previous government?

What Dr Mizzi was not saying was that the chief executive of Enemalta at the time had now been appointed to head Air Malta.

Did the government have faith in this person or not? What investigations were carried out into Enemalta officials and employees to find out why no action was taken?

The Opposition would not justify any failings by Enemalta but the government was acting in an even worse manner because it had taken the conscious decision not to proceed against more than 1,000 people who paid bribes, he said.

It was not fair to condemn the former minister, Mr Fenech, when there was no proof that it was his decision, and not the decision of Enemalta officials, that the files should be ignored.

Mr Pullicino said that after hearing Dr Mizzi it seemed the definitions of “bribe” and “theft” had changed. The minister was trying to camouflage the government’s decision not to take criminal action against those who bribed Enemalta officials to provide them with tempered smart meters.

He accused Dr Mizzi of trying to cover it all up by referring to what he was alleging took place in the past, by saying that Enemalta did nothing to collect the money. But, Mr Pullicino insisted, theft was one thing, bribery was another.

After the abandoned files were found, which officials responsible during that period had been questioned? Was the former executive chairman, Louis Giordimaina, questioned? And what about the financial controller, Antoine Galea: was he asked to explain why no steps were taken against the consumers?

Any erring Enemalta official should answer for his actions and criminal procedures should be taken.

Mr Pullicino said the Opposition would have been behind the government if it had the political decency to take to court all those people who had been so willing to bribe Enemalta officials.

Mr Fenech, who was responsible for Enemalta during the last administration, said he was pleased a whistleblower had spoken up and the case revealed.

It was not fair to condemn the former minister, Mr Fenech, when there was no proof that it was his decision

Politicians were not there to conceal those committing corruption but should act together against corruption and theft.

However, Dr Mizzi seemed to be more concerned with smearing others and shifting the blame on politicians rather than blaming those who stole electricity.

The previous administration too had fought corruption, but it took action. He mentioned as an example the VAT case in which people were charged and went to prison, including PN supporters.

What concrete evidence did Dr Mizzi have that some politician gave a directive that these files should be hidden? If it existed, then he should come out with it today or else he should stop making accusations.

If these files were passed on the police, what had stopped the police from taking action?

Replying, Dr Mizzi said he was astonished by the Opposition members’ comments because all this had happened under their watch.

On a point of order, Mr Pullicino asked whether the minister was saying that no action was taken on these files because of a political decision.

Dr Mizzi once again expressed surprise at this attitude – all this had happened under a Nationalist government. This was an amnesty without precedent because the police had been called in, theft proven, but nothing done about it.

“Of course this means that there was political responsibility which must be shouldered.”

A heated exchange then broke out with Mr Fenech saying no one could make statements and insinuations against an MP without proof.

Dr Mizzi said it was ridiculous of the Opposition to criticise the pristine work the government was carrying out at Enemalta when it was under the previous administration, exactly between 2006 and 2011, that the cases of theft had occurred.

The Opposition was shameless and those who were responsible for Enemalta bore political responsibility for what had happened.

On a point of order, Mr Pullicino asked whether Dr Mizzi was implying that no action had been taken due to a political decision by the previous government.

Answering, Mr Mizzi said he could not understand why the Opposition was so angry about this point when it was true that it was under the PN administration that all these theft cases had occurred, just as it was true that they had thrown the 665 files away in a box.

Mr Fenech asked whether the minister knew who had given the instruction to those civil servants to put the files away.

He called on the Speaker to give a ruling, insisting he had no previous knowledge of the files’ existence.

Dr Mizzi said the previous administration had to carry the political responsibility for what had happened and those who were in charge of Enemalta had to be held accountable.

It was true, the previous administration had resorted to hiding those files and putting them away.

Both Mr Fenech and Mr Pullicino called on Dr Mizzi to retract the allegations against them otherwise the Speaker would have to “name” him, a form of Parliamentary censure. They both categorically challenged the allegations.

Dr Mizzi said he was being clear and wished to address all the issues instead of being continuously interrupted by the Opposition.

At 7.14pm, Mr Speaker suspended the session to hear the recording and give a ruling as requested by the Opposition. The House only reconvened at 10.25pm.