Updated | Labour says EC infringement case not connected to Delimara irregularities

Updated with Labour reaction 2:50pm

During this infringement procedure, the Commission focused on issues of EU public procurement law.

“Following a thorough analysis of the legal issues at stake in this case, and on the basis of all the information it had gathered, the Commission did not find any evidence of an eventual infringement of EU law by the Maltese authorities, and it has therefore closed these infringement proceedings,” the government said.

European Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services Michel Barnier had written to foreign minister Tonio Borg, raising serious doubts on legal changes in emissions rules, which the Commissioner said was carried out to benefit Danish firm BWSC’s bid for a diesel-powered engine that had been previously ruled out by emission laws.

“The change… occurred at a very late stage, just a few days before the expiry of deadline for the receipt of the final bids so that the deadline for the submission of the final offers was extended by four weeks. The change was not necessary to comply with European legislation as the Maltese authorities seemed to indicate [but] to benefit one of the exceptions to the applicability of the Large Combustion Plant Directive,” the Commission said.

It added that the new emission limits only applied to diesel engines and not to gas power plants, meaning this disadvantaged a bid by Israeli firm Bateman, which was proposing a cheaper, gas technology.

The government said the Commission had found that no discrimination can be found in this case between diesel powered plants and other technologies.

Secondly, the Commission referred to the right of appeal of unsuccessful bidders and found that EU law had been preserved since the procurement contract informed the unsuccessful bidders of the outcome of the tendering process, and that therefore the unsuccessful bidder could have exercised its right of appeal.

n its reaction, Labour said the Commission’s investigation had not focused on the irregularities revealed by the Labour party and mentioned in the Auditor General’s report.

“The EC’s report is clear in that it investigated two aspects pertaining solely to European regulations, and specifies that the Commissioner has not investigated the entire procurement process. It also said it would reopen proceedings if there are new facts.”

Labour said it the NAO had investigated the procurement and found numerous irregularities. “Even though there was no conclusive proof of corruption the Auditor General noted that main witnesses had not been cooperative during questioning. The EC’s investigation did not focus on how the change in emissions laws was instigated by BWSC’s non-qualification for the initial tender, or the ‘high level political’ contacts the BWSC agent had in Malta.”