Former shadow finance minister Tonio Fenech says he no longer has any of the e-mails exchanged in the 'Shadow Finance Google Group,' which has seen three employees from the Central Bank, National Statistics Office, and Malta Financial Services Authority accused of spying by Prime Minister Joseph Muscat.

Mr Fenech denies that any sensitive information was leaked by the three men, Keith Zahra, Chris Pace and Carlos Camenzuli, although he cannot offer any proof in the form of e-mails.

Why did you choose these particular individuals for this shadow finance group?

First of all they were people I knew. This was not a group that was selected solely on the pretext that people were in the public sector. In reality most of the people were not in the public sector.

The group was a bigger group of people with technical competence, they were all qualified people, economists, people in the financial sector, experienced businessmen. The whole idea was to support me then as shadow minister of finance, which is why the group was called shadow finance group, to keep me abreast with what is happening not in the public sector, but in the economy at large, in the financial industry at large, to be able to have an educated and knowledgeable view as a party before taking certain positions.

Therefore the group was used through Google to share a press statement, for them to give a comment, for them to give their reaction to the press statement, because obviously they would then reflect on how the press statement would be received.

The people in reality came from various walks of life, mostly in the professional sphere.

Yes, but ultimately the whole controversy is about these three-four people...

...Yes, because the government obviously decided to single them out, very unfairly. Clearly these people were not acting as spy. By merely association yourself with a political party and being in a Google group, does not make you a political spy.

I want to mention some individuals who when the Nationalist Party was in government, they were involved with the Labour Party and were in very sensitive places. We have a Member of Parliament Silvio Schembri, who in his time used to be an employee with the Central Bank of Malta (CBM), when he openly started to militate with the Labour party, and was elected to the Luqa local council.

Nobody at the CBM stopped him, told him to leave or called him a spy.

We have today, Wenzu Mintoff, who has been appointed as a judge by this government, who in his time under our government was head of the legal unit a Malta Enteprise.

He was openly Labour, which is fine, he used to write regularly as a columnist in Kullhadd, Malta Enterprise never stopped him, but then he decided to also become the editor of the paper.

Malta Enterprise then had asked him to consider his position. Being the editor of the Labour Party paper Kullhadd was going a bit overboard, in terms of political involvement and the implications it would have on Malta Enterprise.

Do you know what Wenzu Mintoff's reaction was? His reaction was that this is political discrimination.

So in the case of Wenzu Mintoff, Labour thought it to be political discrimination to be asked to consider your position because you are the editor of a newspaper and hold a top managerial position.

These three people are also claiming political discrimination...

Precisely, and that is why it is unfair that Joseph Muscat is labelling them as spies, without any evidence. What did they spy on? What is the revealing issue that the papers came out with that was a state secret which was revealed. Because that is what spying means...

Would you be willing to publish all the e-mails in this group then?

I do not have all the e-mails, because as you know Google does not retain all the history of e-mails. I think after a month they are mostly...but...Labour have them, or whoever... I have no problem...

I'm asking if you would have a problem publishing them?

I have no problem if they had to publish them all, I don't have them.

You must have something...

I have no problem with them being published...

I'm asking if you are willing to publish whatever you have

I don't have them.

So what did you do with the group, did you delete it?

This group has been off since the reshuffle at the beginning of the year, that's a good six months.

I find it a bit hard to believe that you do not have any records

No I don't keep such record, that's why we used a Google group. I don't stay printing every e-mail.

You don't need to print it you can just keep a soft copy

No I don't. I don't even have a soft copy of the data from when I was a minister, I don't keep such things. I think that it government information, if there is need for it, it can be accessed. In reality a computer slows down if you keep too much information on it.

There are always external hard drives...

Yes but why should I have gone into such a cost?

It is always good to have records...

I don't deem it of any worth holding such records. That is not the issue. The issue is these people have been suspended on claims made by politically lenient papers, it's not like it came out from the independent media, it clearly came out from a central hand clearly close to this government.

My question is, were they actually scanning and spying on our e-mails. Where is data protection?

Was this a public or private group?

This was a private group. Somebody must have been scanning or monitoring these e-mails, and at the opportune time decided to come out with them. Is the government spying on us? That is a very important question to be asked, they could be spying on my group, they might be spying on your e-mail. What procedures were followed?

The second issue is, what were they spying on? The Malta Financial Services Authority when one of the officials is a PRO there, he is not the PRO, he is not even a manager, he is in the PRO unit...

I'll give you this, the issue of spying is political spin, but the fact is they were actively helping you during office hours...

There is nothing wrong, not during office hours...

So they happened to be off during these exchanges?

Let's be clear. The accusation was not that they were doing other things during office hours. That is the corrective measures Labour is trying to take to mitigate the fact that it exaggerated. On that exaggeration action has been taken against these people, these people are suspended on half-pay.

So I have to defend these people against this exaggeration, because that is the issue. The paper is very clear, 'Tonio's spies.' If you don't believe it fine, but this is the accusation. And this is what Joseph Muscat, the Prime Minister accused them of, and said serious action needs to be taken against them because they are spies.

If you don't believe that, just go with a headline and say Joseph Muscat is exaggerating, this is purely political spin. I agree with you. But this is still today the accusation of this government against these people.

Not let me put the facts straight. I can assure I know more inside information on the MFSA than Keith Zahra himself. You know why? Because in this country, we have political consensus in the financial services sector.

So what this paper claimed is completely flawed. In this country we have a consensual approach on financial services. I, under the direction of the Minister of Finance Edward Scicluna, Joe Bannister was instructed, like we used to do in our time, to keep me updated on everything. I used to meet Joe Bannister every month, I did not need Keith Zahra to tell me what is happening in the MFSA.

I can assure you I knew more than Keith Zahra could have every told me, and that is the issue.

Secondly, the Central Bank. Now even here the government is saying these people should have been loyal to government. Wrong. Public servants are loyal to the state of Malta and the people of Malta, not Joseph Muscat.

They are supposed to be a-political.

Well a-political is impossible in society.

They are supposed to be, in theory at least...

No, not in theory...

In their work...

They should ensure in their work that they are of integrity and have no political bias. I can assure you they always did their work diligently as they should.

But there was some political bias demonstrated here

But you're saying public servants do not have an opinion?

They were actively helping the Opposition...

Sorry, Wenzu Mintoff was editor of Kulhadd...

We are not talking about Wenzu Mintoff, we are talking about this now...

In life you cannot see things in isolation. You cannot condemn these people for something which was acceptable. The public service code, what it doesn't allow public servants to do, is publicly, publicly...

This is very public now

Well...

No, no, it's public now

Not thanks to us. It was a private group. Somebody hacked it. So if the government hacks it, puts it in the media, then these people become public? I'm sorry...

But the fact that they were aiding you draft press releases is public now

You are saying it is wrong people have a political allegiance and they support a political party?

This was going beyond mere support, they were helping you draft press releases as well

Fine, there is nothing wrong with that, they have every right to do so, and to give their own opinions, using public information. They were not using any secret information.

The Central Bank of Malta is an independent institution. It answers to the ECB not Joseph Muscat.

Or the Opposition...

They were not answering to me, they were just contributing to the political debate on a closed Google group, not editors of a newspaper. There is a big difference, if it was fine for Wenzu Mintoff, if it was political discrimination in his case, then what is this, this is political terrorisation.

You could argue that this is even more underhanded, it was being done in a private Google group

Why underhanded, what did they say wrong?

I can't say, you're not willing, or you're saying you don't have all the relevant documents

I don't have, but we are talking about what is public. I assume the worst e-mails have come out. Is it a state secret that the Freeport terminal had a loan from government guaranteed? That's a state secret? Their accounts are published on their website. What state secret is this?

Till today Orizzont are hiding the amount because they are saying it is confidential. I downloaded it today, today it is still there. Public information is not a state secret.

First of all they were not even commenting on their entities, they were commenting on public statistics.

The very fact that this has been made public has compromised them

Yes, but I did not compromise them. Orizzont, It-Torca, and Joseph Muscat did. Why did he compromise them?  For political assassination, full stop. Because Joseph Muscat does not accept that there are Nationalists in the public sector.

And if you are Nationalist, unless you declare yourself to become Labour you are out. That is the message Joseph Muscat is sending to this country. We are back to the 1980s.

So you have these independent institutions investigating the case, now if they find wrongdoing, are you going to blame it on pressure from Joseph Muscat?

Clearly, there is pressure, because the way at least two of the institutions are acting is not consistent with how they acted in previous cases.

Clearly there is political interference. In the case of one of them, not even an accusation note has been issued to him. He has just been suspended without an explanation.

It shows you that these entities are not acting independently. Obviously we know the NSO director general did not have his contract renewed and they hand-picked one who is clearly and vociferously Labour leaning.

I don't think three people involving themselves in a Google group is an issue. In this country we have a Constitution which speaks about freedom of association. What the public service code talks about is discretion.

Obviously everyone in Malta is Labour, Nationalist or Alternattiva Demokratika. Very few are completely a-political. What only those people can be employed in the public sector?

Everybody knows you are expected to be loyal in not attacking your institution, in fact the oath they take is not towards the government, they take it towards their institution. I can assure you they have not broken their oath.