The heated controversy over the award of a e210 million contract for the extension of the Delimara power station to Danish company Burmeister & Wain Scandinavian Contractor (BWSC) has gone from simmering to boiling over in the last two days.

In correspondence published yesterday, BWSC executive director Soren Barkholt floated the idea of holding a four-party meeting as soon as possible, commenting: “To try to assist in getting to the bottom of this case, we suggest to arrange a meeting with the Auditor General and the Leader of the Opposition on the first coming Monday – if such a meeting can be arranged.”

Mr Barkholt wrote to Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat yesterday afternoon to request he attends the meeting so as to “explain BWSC’s view and position on the serious accusations seen in the press the last couple of days”.

While the meeting has been scheduled for between 11am and 2pm on Monday, an Infrastructure Ministry spokesperson confirmed that, as of yesterday evening, the auditor-general had agreed to BWSC’s request, while the Labour Party was still to reply.

The ministry yesterday accused the Labour Party of reluctance to meet with BWSC to ask the company the questions it wanted answered. It also accused the party of concealing the fact that BWSC had requested a meeting on Monday when the party issued press releases after the Opposition Leader had received the meeting request straight from BWSC.

On Friday, Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat presented the auditor-general with a dossier of press clippings from 2003 from Danish newspaper Borsen, which reported alleged cases in which the company was said to have bribed foreign officials – from The Philippines to Sri Lanka to the Bahamas – to win tenders.

Soon after on Friday afternoon, Infrastructure Minister Austin Gatt requested an explanation of the articles from BWSC. But, according to the Opposition, the answers provided yesterday leave more questions pending than have been answered.

BWSC yesterday published a Danish police statement to the effect that the police investigation into the alleged misdoings and bribery raised by the newspaper had been dropped.

In the 4 October 2004 correspondence published, Danish police assessor Ulla Greibe noted: “The grounds for this ruling are that there is no probable cause that a criminal offence, which could be pursued by the public authorities, has been committed.”

In the letter, however, Ms Greibe added: “My ruling may, possibly if appealed, be changed by the superior Public Prosecutor.” In its communications published by the ministry yesterday, BWSC made no mention of whether the ruling had been appealed or if the ruling had been effectively overruled by the public prosecutor.

The PL also noted that the police assessor had not said whether there had been corruption, but rather stated that that there was no probable cause for action under Danish law.

The Labour Party described the series of correspondence ensuing between the ministry and BWSC over the last two days as a “predictable and panicked” manoeuvre.

In one of a series of tit for tat statements issued yesterday, the ministry charged the Opposition with effectively accusing the Danish police and legal system of not acting on corruption, because they had “disagreed with the Labour Party that the allegations of corruption made yesterday (Friday) have some form of relationship with reality”.

The ministry added that the Opposition believed that the Danish newspaper’s accusations of corruption provided “irrefutable proof” of corruption in the Delimara contract, and that the party valued the accusations made by the newspaper over the conclusions of the Danish police investigations into those accusations.

The Labour Party, meanwhile, pointed out how Dr Gatt had, on Friday, chosen to send the letter requesting an explanation to the 2003 Danish press reports to the same person who had been implicated by the newspaper in the reports of alleged bribery, Soren Barkholt, the company’s executive director.

Moreover, the party noted, BWSC’s reply failed to refer to other “worrying cases” of alleged corruption within the company, involving millions of euros, in which BWSC’s mother company, the Japanese corporation Mitsui, had been involved and which had landed people in prison. As such, the PL said, the dropping of investigations by the Danish police had not absolved BWSC of claims of corruption.

The PL also pointed out yesterday that, despite the fact that the government advocated the independence of parastatal companies, it had been the ministry itself and not Enemalta that had become directly involved in the case in question. It also seemed, the party added, that the minister had appointed himself spokesman for the company, although BWSC had an agent in Malta who was receiving a e4 million commission for having won the power station contract for BWSC.

Moreover, the PL added, BWSC had not referred to the “serious allegations” made over recent months over how the Malta contract had been won. Such allegations, the party said, included written statements to the effect that BWSC’s agent in Malta had bragged of connections with senior government and Enemalta personnel that would have helped the company win the Delimara contract, statements that had been passed on to the auditor-general.



PL takes exception to PBS reportage

The Labour Party yesterday filed a protest with state broadcaster PBS, copied to the Broadcasting Authority, over the way its news bulletin had carried the story on Friday evening, complaining that: “By its conduct, the national station, both on TVM as well as on Radio Malta, again reduced the importance of the content of the press conference [held Friday afternoon outside the Auditor General’s office], which was of national importance.”

Contacted yesterday, PBS editor Natalino Fenech remarked how he was surprised by both Evarist Bartolo’s reaction and the protest lodged by MLP president and acting secretary-general Dr Stefan Zrinzo Azzopardi.

But on the other hand, he said, such reactions should not come as a surprise, as there was an obvious effort to try to discredit PBS, as survey after survey has shown its news bulletin audiences to be increasing.

Dr Fenech added that he was concerned that the acting Labour Party secretary-general was mounting a campaign that was not based on the truth.

Over the past weeks, he said, Dr Zrinzo Azzopardi complained because the party alleged PBS had not carried a statement by the Labour Party. The statement was a summary of the speech made by the Opposition Leader that PBS had carried in the same bulletin. The Labour Party’s media officer, he added, then expected PBS to carry a statement that had “absolutely no news value” the following Sunday, which PBS had refused to do, and, Dr Fenech pointed out, had PBS carried it, it would have been in breach of broadcasting law.

He added: “In another protest based on a gross untruth, the Labour Party president Dr Zrinzo Azzopardi said that PBS gave the Prime Minister 10 minutes more than the Leader of the Opposition in press conferences related to the budget, when this was absolutely not true and that is something one can easily verify by looking at our news bulletins. I have sent both Dr Zrinzo Azzopardi as well as the Broadcasting Authority information about this and I am sure that when the case is heard by the BA, truth will really prevail.”

On Friday, he insists, PBS covered both what the Opposition Leader as well as the Minister concerned had to say about the power station tender issue.

“PBS will not be drawn into any case to further anyone’s arguments,” Dr Fenech added. “It is not clear where, in Mr Bartolo’s eyes, TVM went wrong. From someone who teaches journalism at university, I expect a higher level of professionalism and ethics, at least where the media is concerned.”