PD demands investigation into Vitals hospitals concession

The Democratic Party welcomed the agreement between the government and the Nationalist Opposition to debate the recent transfer of the concession to Steward Healthcare but also called for an investigation into the initial deal

St Luke's Hospital was one of three state hospitals transferred to Vitals as part of the public-private partnership deal
St Luke's Hospital was one of three state hospitals transferred to Vitals as part of the public-private partnership deal

The Democratic Party has agreed with the government that the debate on the concession awarded to Vitals Global Healthcare should be held in a plenary sitting of the House so that all MPs would be able to have their say.

However, the PD also agreed with the Nationalist Party's stand that there should be an opportunity for witnesses to be summoned, and called for an investigation of the VGH concession.

The PD was reacting to the latest developments involving the hospitals agreement after the government announced that Vitals was transferring the concession to American company Steward Healthcare.

Read more: Government afraid of involving stakeholders in VGH discussion - PN

Earlier this week, the PN called for a debate in Parliament's healthcare committee, which would have allowed MPs to summon witnesses. The government agreed to have a debate in the plenary, where witnesses cannot be summoned.

The PD said the best forum for an investigation is the National Audit Office that had the constitutional power to carry out indepth audits. The Vitals concession agreement was referred to the NAO in 2016 but it is still in the queue as a result of other audits being undertaken by the Auditor General.

PD said it was evident that VGH did not honour the agreement and failed to meet the contractual deadlines. Because of this, the party believes that the agreement should be considered null and void.

“If the agreement has not been honoured, we do not consider it right or good practice that VGH should have been allowed to sell on the concession to another company,” the PD said.

“The government should have taken over that role and any profit made in the sale of the concession should have been put back into the public purse. We need to know why this was not the case.”

The contents of Gozo general Hospital, Karin Grech Hospital and St. Luke’s Hospital were all sold for the token sum of €1, the PD said. The sale of assets for one monetary unit is common practice when a bankrupt company which is about to be dissolved is sold.

“As far as we know the Department of Health and the Government of Malta are neither bankrupt nor about to be dissolved. It is certain that the assets of these three hospitals are worth far more than €1. It is also evident that this part of the agreement was redacted in the version presented to Parliament. Again, we need to know why.”

PD said there was no evidence that VGH invested money into upgrading the facilities conceded to it. The money spent were recycled government funds paid to it for services it had or was meant to have rendered, the statement said.

 “The VGH-Government of Malta agreement is an example of how not to handle a private-public partnership concession. The whole sorry business has been shrouded in secrecy, the details clouded in obscurity and the Maltese people left mired in doubt about how much we really needed this agreement, and whether it was really done for the public good of for other reasons,” PD concluded.