Momentum said Thursday it has received the results of a Freedom of Information request regarding the controversial gravel works at Ta' Qali, which showed that €311,141.80 was spent to cover an area at the Ta' Qali park with gravel.

The documents, combined with a declaration tabled in Parliament yesterday, paint a worrying picture of excessive spending and regulatory bypassing, the party said..

Total Material Cost was €311,141.80, Momentum said, and the process was done by direct order to Bonnici Brothers. No permits were obtained and the gravel was imported from Greece.

The gravelling of the area raised controversy earlier this year, with criticism levelled as to why grass was covered by gravel.

The FOI reply reveals that the total material cost for the gravel stands at €311,141.801. Despite this massive expense, the government did not issue a public tender. Instead, the procurement was processed as a direct order justified under PPN 321b2, Momentum said.

The contract was awarded to Bonnici Bros Ltd, with the justification that the contractor was "already carrying out works within the same area".

The FOI documents explicitly state that the material's origin is Greece. This information was further corroborated yesterday by a one-page declaration tabled in Parliament, confirming that taxpayer money was sent abroad rather than supporting local industry.

Momentum said it is alarmed that no environmental impact assessment was conducted, nor were any statutory permits obtained from ERA. Particularly when considering that the gravel covered a massive area of 30,000m2and lead to the importation of about 5,000 tonnes of non-native rock mixture to Maltese soil.

Authorities justified this lack of oversight by claiming the project "does not require any statutory permit from ERA" and is simply "part of the ongoing maintenance process of the picnic area and grounds".

Mark Camilleri Gambin said "We now have confirmation from both the FOI and Parliament that over €300,000 was spent on imported gravel. By labelling this major expense as routine 'maintenance,' authorities have conveniently sidestepped environmental scrutiny and competitive tendering. Besides the fact that this was completely unnecessary and evidently a failure. Let's, for a moment, think where this money could have been better spent: healthcare, education, scholarships, or people in need?"