Opposition leader Simon Busuttil said this morning that it was not enough for the prime minister to say that he would reverse the Gaffarena expropriation deal if wrongdoing was discovered.
Speaking at a PN activity, Dr Busuttil said there was nothing to discover. The wrongdoing was obvious, and it was not the fruit of any mistake.
What had been done was calculated and hidden. Such things, he said, amounted to institutionalized corruption.
Reversing the deal was the least that the government could do. The prime minister and Parliamentary Secretary Michael Falzon had to live up to their promises of good governance and political accountability.
Dr Falzon had initially said he had nothing to do with the deal. Now he had admitted to Malta Today to having met Mr Gaffarena and discussed the case before the expropriation.
He admitted having gone hunting abroad with Mr Gaffarena.
He admitted that Mr Gaffarena had himself requested the expropriation. This, Dr Busuttil said, was absolutely unheard of. The government expropriated properties to meet its needs, and not the other way around.
Dr Falzon had even admitted that Mr Gaffarena himself chose the land given to him as compensation for his share of the expropriated Old Mint Street property.
He had admitted that one of his officials had accompanied Mr Gaffarena to the Land Department. Dr Falzon then signed the expropriation.
“What is Michael Falzon waiting for to resign?,” Dr Busuttil said.
Political accountability, he insisted, had also to be shouldered by the prime minister. He was the minister directly responsible for lands. Dr Falzon was only the parliamentary secretary under the prime minister.
And it was Dr Muscat who promised political accountability and good governance.
It would not be enough for Dr Falzon to resign. Dr Muscat too had to assume responsibility.
Dr Busuttil recalled that when the Cafe’ Premier scandal broke, Dr Muscat had said the government made a mistake, the fruit of haste and inexperience.
There could be no such excuses this time.
Mr Gaffarena sold his first quarter of the Old Mint Street property a month before Dr Muscat made those comments. He then made his second sale a month after. Therefore, while Dr Muscat was claiming a mistake on Cafe' Premier, he was committing a worse scandal. Therefore, Dr Muscat had been lying about having committed a mistake.
Dr Busuttil also pointed out how compensation to Mr Gaffarena was paid within days for his share of the Old Mint Street property. He was also given a range of properties as part of the compensation package.
Times of Malta had engaged independent experts who found that conservatively, the value of those properties was twice what was claimed.
The properties included a house in Sliema whose groundrent would expire next year and its value would rise sharply, and land in White Rocks, a prime site. There was also a huge site in Zebbug adjacent to Mr Gaffarena’s own property, meaning far higher value.
This showed institutional corruption. It was not enough to drop the deal. Political responsibility had to be borne, Dr Busuttil said.
In other comments Dr Busuttil kept up his attack on government plans to use Zonqor as the site for the new university. He said that while the opposition had questions on the qualifications of the investor to set up a university, it was strongly against using a site outside development zones to realise this project.
He also hit out at the new code of ethics for ministers, saying it conveyed a wrong message from the prime minister.
The PN, he said, wanted to clean up politics and he intended to launch initiatives in this direction, including a proposed new code of ethics which a new PN government would enforce from its first day in office.