Bartolo asks auditor-general to investigate foundation

Opposition education spokesman Evarist Bartolo said yesterday that he was amazed by the blind confidence which Education Minister Louis Galea showed on Monday in the members of the board of the Foundation for Tomorrow's Schools.

The minister expressed his confidence in the board members when he spoke on the resignation of two of the three members of the board of inquiry into whether the foundation had violated government financial regulations.

Mr Bartolo said a man of Dr Galea's experience should have been more cautious, more so as the board of inquiry had not concluded its work.

There had been several instances in the past when Dr Galea's confidence was misplaced. He had had, for example, confidence in Norman Bezzina, who was now awaiting trial on alleged drug importation, and Joe Cannataci, the head of the restoration centre. Perhaps the minister could speak about the state of relations which existed between the restoration centre and Italian state institutions such as the Istituto del restauro di Roma. This relationship had now been soured. Why?

Referring to the details of the minister's statement on Monday, Mr Bartolo said the minister had appointed the members of the Foundation for Tomorrow's Schools and most of the members of the board of inquiry tasked to investigate them. It was for this reason that the opposition immediately said this inquiry could not be serious.

Mr Bartolo said he was now calling on the auditor-general to investigate the foundation.

He was asking the auditor to investigate how the foundation had sought to manoeuvre out of financial regulations, how it had not observed its own regulations on the issuing of tenders, and how it sometimes did not even seek the approval of its own finance officer for some contracts.

Some contracts were sub-divided into several amounts smaller than Lm20,000 in an attempt to get round the Director of Contracts. Indeed the director had realised what was happening and warned the foundation.

He wanted the auditor to investigate how contracts appeared to have been awarded without proper safeguards for taxpayers' money, how no letters of acceptance were issued, how no bank guarantees were requested, how tender documents were opened at the same time, giving ground for abuse.

Also meriting investigation was the confusion in the way calls for tender were made, how tender documents went unsigned and how variations to contracts were not authorised.