The auditor general has accused catering company James Caterers of trying to intimidate and influence an investigation into a controversial contract at a state home for the elderly.

In a letter to the National Audit Office, James Catering Ltd warned it would hold NAO officers personally responsible for any reputational damage from an audit into two tenders linked to the Saint Vincent de Paul facility.

The NAO is assessing a 2015 tender that began as a request for meals and a kitchen at the Luqa home and morphed into a second project to extend the facility.

It was won by a consortium that includes James Caterers and another firm that forms part of the DB group.

The NAO was asked to investigate the multi-million deal by independent MPs Godfrey and Marlene Farrugia.

But the Auditor General Charles Deguara claims that the catering firm is trying to influence his work and has written to parliament’s Public Accounts Committee to complain.

Writing to Nationalist Party MP Beppe Fenech Adami, the chair of the PAC, Deguara said that after a January meeting with the consortium, he received a letter from James Caterers last month.

Deguara said he deemed it a “contempt of parliamentary proceedings” and maintained that the NAO's work is priviliged.

“Of concern to the National Audit Office is the intimidation that James Caterers Ltd sought to convey in this correspondence, which this Office deems entirely unacceptable and intended to influence the outcome of this audit,” he writes.

“While the National Audit Office will not be intimidated or adversely influenced in its work for Parliament, the matter is being brought to the attention of the Public Accounts Committee, whose support is being sought.”

What did the letter say?

The letter, signed by the catering giant’s managing director James Barbara, begins by stating that the consortium negotiated “in earnest”. It then goes on to say that the company is in the middle of signing a large, international “high value” contract, and says that any “adverse public comments” would impact the negotiations.

“Once again, we must impress the fact that no adverse comment, direct or indirect, can be afforded against the JCL [James Caterers Ltd] or the consortium.”

It says that the government and any entities, including the NAO, could have stepped in at any time to stop the tender award and questioned why it was being investigated now.

“It is not right that post-award, and having invested over forty million into this project, the tender process is now set for review.”

The letter continued by stating the JCL is not “responsible for any shortcomings” nor should “take the brunt for any shortcomings” of others.

And it warned that any “negative or adverse comments are raised” about the company or consortium that would impact its current negotiations, the company would “have no option but to hold the NAO and its officers personally responsible for the reputational and material damage” it would suffer. 

How did the NAO respond?

The NAO’s lawyer, professor Ian Refalo, replied to James Caterers by saying the letter was “extremely offensive and disturbing” and a “not so veiled” reference to legal action was “unwarranted”.

"My clients are officers of Parliament and their reports to Parliament are privileged and they will not be interfered with in the proper and correct performance of their public duty."

Replying on James Caterers' behalf, lawyer Stefano Filletti said the letter was “never intended to offend, disturb or in any way interfere” with the NAO’s work. 

“On the contrary, their sole motivation was to defend, and safeguard their professional integrity and hard-earned positive reputation and trust they enjoy among the business community at large.”