Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1493590
maltatoday | SUNDAY •26 FEBRUARY 2023 9 INTERVIEW enough'... already in place, to implement it instead. In other words: there is noth- ing the Prime Minister can do – no matter how much time he takes, to 'analyse the ruling' – except… assume responsibility. But what does 'assume respon- sibility' actually mean, in this context? Are you asking him to resign? Do you expect him to face criminal proceedings? In practical terms; HOW do you expect this responsibility to be shouldered? Let me put it this way: there is more than one type of respon- sibility involved, here. There is political responsibility, certain- ly; but there is also personal re- sponsibility. May I remind you that Robert Abela's extended reaction – i.e., beyond that four-line state- ment – was also to argue that: "I wasn't there, at the time! I didn't sign any contracts! I wasn't even a Member of Parliament…" Now: I'm not even going to delve into the question of when, precisely, Robert Abela became legal counsel to his predecessor, in Castille. But every single time that there was a Budget vote – after Robert Abela became an MP – both he, and the rest of his parliamentary group, always voted in favour. Not only that: but – as Prime Minister – Robert Abela actu- ally INCREASED the budget- ary allocation to Steward: even when it was flagrantly obvious, that the works themselves had not been completed. Meanwhile: after Steward themselves had publicly ad- mitted that this contract was fraudulent [in a UK court-case], I actually tabled all the relevant documents in Parliament – to bring them to the attention of all MPs – and together with Dr Bernard Grech, I subsequently filed a Judicial Protest: holding all MPs responsible, for NOT giving them another budgetary allocation. But sure enough: Prime Min- ister Robert Abela – and all his Cabinet; and all his MPs – vot- ed once again to give Steward an additional E80 million, of your money… Once again, however, you are merely repeating what is al- ready common knowledge. But what do you think should actually happen, as a result of this ruling? I don't think I should be the one to say what should hap- pen… With all due respect: you seem reluctant to (for example) 'call for the Prime Minister's resig- nation'. Why is that? Reluctant? Not at all. It's just that… personally, I think it should go far beyond 'res- ignations', at this stage. Be- cause 'resignation' simply means 'stepping down'… 'go- ing away'… and quite frankly: that's not going to be anywhere near enough, to assume respon- sibility for this case. So let's break it down a bit fur- ther, shall we? If the court con- cluded that there was certainly 'fraud', in these contracts – and also the 'possibility of criminal- ity' - doesn't responsibility also imply that the Commissioner of Police should IMMEDIATELY commence an investigation? And shouldn't this criminal investigation also focus on – not just the government offi- cials who were involved – but also every single entity, individ- ual, and government/public au- thority, that was mentioned in this ruling itself? But there is more to it, than even that. In the court's own words; this was a deal which would have cost the country E4 billion; just for the first of three 30-year periods (with the possi- bility of being further extended.) In other words: the rescission of this contract will certainly save the Maltese taxpayer at least E4 billion, over the next 30 years (and beyond)… … but what about the E300 million we have already paid: getting absolutely nothing in return? What is government going to do, to ensure that those funds are returned to our coun- try's coffers? Isn't that 'political responsibility', too? After all: how many times does govern- ment tells us that: "We don't have enough money for this, that, or the other"? Whether it's pensions; education; alternative energy… or even whether it's rebuilding those three hospi- tals, that have been allowed to fall into disrepair as a result of this fraudulent deal. Because apart from the fact that the Gozo Hospital, Karin Grech and St Luke's are all still derelict, to this day: even Ma- ter Dei is now under addition- al pressure… as it has to 'com- pensate', for the failure of those other hospitals to ever materi- alize. So… are we going to just let those E300 million go? And does it have to take another MP, like myself, to open yet another court case, to get that money back? Shouldn't it be the Government of Malta's respon- sibility, now, to say to those fraudsters: 'Listen: you stole 300 million from us… now it's time to pay it all back?' This is why I maintain that it's not enough for Robert Abela to simply say: "Sorry! I screwed up! Now I'm going to resign!" No: what is needed is – first and foremost – a thorough criminal investigation, into what can only be described as the greatest act of fraud that this country has ever seen; but also, the restitution of ALL the funds, that were stolen from the Maltese taxpayer: down to the very last penny… Onto other issues now: the same court case has also raised questions of who should take the 'credit' for the out- come. You yourself are widely credited with having spear- headed the whole case; yet now, other Opposition mem- bers (including the ones who rebelled against your own leadership, in 2020) seem to be eagerly 'jumping onto your bandwagon'… I'm really not interested in any of that, myself… I know you're not. But our readers are: so I have to at least ask the question. How do you feel, personally, about the fact that people like Jason Azzopardi – who until recently was accusing you yourself of 'criminality' – are now trying to take all the credit, for the results of your hard work? Look: the very last thing I want to do, is reduce something as 'historic' as this, into a silly little spat between myself and Jason Azzopardi. Honestly, I think it's high time we move beyond all that, now…. But to answer your question anyway: first of all, I think it would be very unfair of me, to claim that I did everything 'alone, and unaided'. As a mat- ter of fact, Jason Azzopardi WAS involved, when I first filed the case; and it's true that he – among others – DID help out, at the time. In fact, one of the first things the Judge pointed out, in his ruling, was that: in this case, there were 55 witnesses; over 44 sittings; and over 3,000 pages of documented evidence. Quite frankly, it is not even possible for any one single individual to do all that, alone. I have my lawyers to thank – especially Edward de Bono: who deserves full credit – but then again: I can't mention one person, with- out mentioning all the others… so I'll stop there, for now. One last question: this case seems to have 're-energised' the Nationalist Party, at a point when it appeared to be at its lowest-ever ebb. Don't you find it ironic that – two years after being so acrimoniously 'deposed', as PN leader – you yourself are still clearly 'set- ting the agenda', for the PN? [Very long pause] I don't think I am 'setting the PN's agenda', myself. If anything, I think it is more the case that the rul- ing itself – this milestone court judgement: the first of its kind, in our country's recent political history – is what's really 'setting the agenda'. And not just for the PN, either; but for every single citizen in this country. Because what this ruling actu- ally implies, is that… yes, actu- ally: it IS possible, to defeat cor- ruption. It's not just an empty, meaningless slogan, that: 'Truth and Justice will prevail, in the end'. It is something that can actually happen; that we can MAKE happen… And as such, it reminds us of what our identity, as a political party, has always been: a 'fight against injustice'…