Pullicino retracts privilege complaint against minister over PV contract claim

Nationalist MP and former environment minister George Pullicino has decided to retract parliamentary proceedings in the privileges committee against Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi.

In October, Mizzi said that auditors had found "shameful irregularities" in a €35 million contract for the installation of photovoltaic panels on public buildings, awarded to a Spanish company and Maltese firm Alberta, under Pullicino’s watch before the 2013 general election.

The 25-year contract worth €35 million was awarded to the company at a feed-in tariff of nearly 23c, which Mizzi said was above the market price of 16c.

After Mizzi refused to withdraw his comments, Speaker Anglu Farrugia ruled that Mizzi’s comments were prima facie in breach of privilege.

However, Pullicino today wrote to Farrugia that he has decided not to continue with the procedure as “there can never be true justice from a committee in which the government enjoys a majority of members”.

“The proper forum for this procedure should be an impartial court and not a committee with a partisan majority,” Pullicino wrote. “However, my decision in no way means that I am retracting my strong opposition to what Mizzi had said about me.”

He accused Mizzi of “trying to hide” behind the privileges committee to attack his reputation and integrity.     

“If Mizzi is man enough, I expect him to either retract his allegations and stick with the Speaker’s ruling or to repeat what he said outside Parliament so I can immediately stat a court proceeding against him.” 

During a privileges committee held later this evening to discuss a breach of privilege complaint by Prime Minister Joseph Muscat against Opposition leader Simon Busuttil, Mizzi chose to stand by what he had said in October.

“I respect Parliament and this committee, which I believe offers safeguards to all its members,” Mizzi said. “Pullicino had every right to retract his complaint but it was only through his choice that his complaint wasn’t analyzed in detail.”