With the general election now fast approaching, it is to be expected that the Labour Party steps up its efforts to put the administration in a bad light. However, the fuss the party has made over the illegal dumping by Enemalta, a state corporation, of the hazardous chemical mercaptan is not without justification.

The Times has already gone into certain aspects of the report of the inquiry, focusing principally on the lack of adequate internal control and of accountability generally, not just at Enemalta, which is the corporation concerned in this case, but, also, at other government entities. But there are other points worth commenting upon. The Labour Party, for instance, is making a very serious accusation. Its whip, Joe Mizzi, has said in Parliament that the findings of the inquiry pointed to an official cover-up. The Finance Minister, Tonio Fenech, has reacted correctly by asking the police to investigate the allegations made.

In February last year, the minister had said in a reply to a parliamentary question that the corporation had stopped using the chemical in 2007. However, the burning of the mercaptan had taken place in 2009. It was therefore reasonable on the part of Mr Mizzi to ask if the minister had been purposely misleading Parliament or whether he had in fact been misled by corporation officials.

In fact, according to the minister, his reply to the parliamentary question had been based on information given to him by two senior corporation officials, who were no longer employed with Enemalta. So, clearly, the minister was not given the correct picture. Was he purposely misled to deflect embarrassment to the government? This is worth further investigation too.

The inquiry exonerated top corporation officials as well as the minister, arguing there was no indication that they were ever informed of the burning of the illegal chemical at a site in the limits of Baħrija and Mġarr, close to a fireworks factory. Up to what managerial level then had the decision to burn the chemical been taken? If this is the way matters are handled at the energy corporation, the mind boggles at the extent to which day-to-day operations at the corporation are surpervised.

The matter does not appear to be serious enough to justify making a call for the resignation of the finance minister, but it surely calls for the censuring of certain levels of management for shortcomings that reflect badly on the overall managerial competence at the corporation. An auditor report on the power station contract had found smoke but no fire. In this case, however, there were both the smoke and the fire ... and, to boot, the firemen as well. And to make the case even more intriguing, the six firemen who supervised the burning of the chemical in September 2009 had each received an additional payment. What was the payment for exactly?

Equally amazing is that the corporation’s chemical specialists were not even consulted and no permission was sought from the Malta Environment and Planning Authority. Mepa now says it is seeking legal advice on the inquiry’s findings. Hopefully, the people will eventually be told of the advice that the authority is given, and, more importantly, of any action, if any, it plans to take. The whole case is riddled with unanswered questions, but as this newspaper has already shown, the inquiry has not helped to clear the air completely of the foul smell of the mercaptan.