Abela’s Inner Circle Wins Millions in Public Contracts

A 36-year-old contractor with well-established ties to the Labour Party has secured approximately €1.4 million in contracts from Infrastructure Malta, largely through direct orders, within the last six months of 2024. This practice has drawn criticism from opposition parties and transparency advocates, who argue that such contracts should be subject to open competition to ensure accountability and fair play.

Recent disclosures from Infrastructure Malta reveal that Matthew Bongailas was granted 12 contracts for government projects, predominantly involving the cleaning of stormwater culverts along major arterial roads. These culverts are designed to prevent road flooding during heavy rain, a persistent issue in Malta's infrastructure.

Bongailas, who publicly describes himself as “a proud member of Robert Abela’s team” on social media, registered his company, Bongailas Construction, in January 2020, coinciding with Robert Abela’s appointment as Malta’s prime minister. His affiliation with the Labour Party extends beyond mere support, as he previously worked as a counting hall agent for the party and was actively involved in electoral campaigns. These ties have fueled speculation about whether his contracts were awarded based on merit or political favoritism.

Infrastructure Malta’s Heavy Reliance on Direct Orders

Bongailas is not the only beneficiary of Infrastructure Malta’s discretionary contract-awarding process. Since the appointment of Steve Ellul, a former Labour MEP candidate, as the CEO of the agency, Infrastructure Malta has issued an astonishing 170 direct orders between July and December 2024 alone, amounting to a total expenditure of over €32 million. The sheer scale of these direct orders has raised alarms over transparency and good governance.

A significant number of these contracts exceeded €1 million, a substantial amount of public funds being allocated without a competitive bidding process. Critics argue that bypassing standard tendering procedures opens the door to mismanagement and a lack of accountability in public spending.

Key Recipients of Direct Orders and Political Links

Bonnici Brothers and Their Business Ties to Government Officials

One of the most notable beneficiaries of Infrastructure Malta’s direct orders is Bonnici Brothers, a construction firm that has consistently been awarded millions in government contracts. This company has a well-documented history of business dealings with Prime Minister Robert Abela. Prior to taking office, Abela’s private law firm provided legal services to Bonnici Brothers. Additionally, Abela had direct business relations with Gilbert Bonnici, the company's managing director, further raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

The firm’s continued success in securing lucrative contracts has prompted questions about whether political affiliations are influencing the selection of service providers, rather than objective assessments of capability and value for taxpayer money.

Labour Party Officials Securing Government-Funded Contracts

Beyond Bonnici Brothers, other entities with Labour Party connections have similarly benefitted from non-competitive contracts. Crowdnet, a company owned by Labour’s Organising Secretary William Lewis, was awarded additional road survey projects without facing any form of competition. The company has been repeatedly granted public contracts, fueling accusations of favoritism.

Another major recipient of direct orders is PTmatic Environmental Services, which received a direct order valued at €1 million for the collection and disposal of dredging waste in Valletta’s Grand Harbour. This decision has raised eyebrows, as critics question why such a significant contract was not subjected to a transparent procurement process.

Enemalta’s Direct Orders: Millions Allocated Without Competition

Infrastructure Malta’s reliance on direct orders is not limited to road-related projects. The agency has also allocated significant funds on behalf of Enemalta, the state-owned energy provider, through direct contracts. Several companies have benefited from Enemalta contracts exceeding €1 million each, including:

• Denfar Excavators
• Schembri Barbros
• Bommer Contractors
• Bonnici Brothers
• Philip Agius & Sons
• V&C Contractors

The trend of awarding major contracts without an open call for tenders has amplified concerns over whether public funds are being distributed based on political considerations rather than genuine public interest.

Architect with Controversial History Continues to Receive Public Funds

Architect Antoine Zammit, the owner of Studjuban, has also received direct orders despite his involvement in past controversial projects. Zammit played a significant role in the illegal Capitainerie project, a structure built in Ta’ Xbiex by Transport Malta. Despite this, he was recently awarded another €27,000 in public funds for “professional services related to works at Misraħ ir-Rebħa, Birgu.”

Critics argue that awarding contracts to individuals with a track record of regulatory breaches undermines the integrity of the public procurement system. They have called for greater scrutiny over how contractors are selected and whether past violations should disqualify entities from securing future government work.

Mounting Calls for Transparency and Reform

The growing reliance on direct orders by Infrastructure Malta has drawn criticism from opposition parties, anti-corruption watchdogs, and transparency advocates. The primary concerns surrounding these contracts include:

• Lack of open competition, which prevents other qualified companies from submitting bids.
• Potential political favoritism, where contracts appear to be awarded based on personal connections rather than merit.
• Risk of inflated costs, since competitive bidding is known to drive down prices and ensure taxpayers receive the best value for money.
• Reduced accountability, as direct orders bypass the rigorous checks and balances of standard public procurement procedures.

The Nationalist Party has been vocal in demanding an independent investigation into Infrastructure Malta’s procurement practices. Transparency NGOs have also called for reforms to ensure that taxpayer funds are allocated fairly, with a stronger emphasis on accountability and good governance.

Conclusion: A Broader Issue of Government Oversight

The widespread use of direct orders by Infrastructure Malta is symptomatic of a larger issue in Malta’s governance. The awarding of over €32 million in contracts through a non-competitive process over just six months raises serious questions about the integrity of public procurement.

With mounting public pressure, the government will need to address these concerns to restore trust in its handling of public funds. Whether this will lead to substantial reforms in procurement policies or continued scrutiny over controversial contracts remains to be seen.

FAQs

What is Infrastructure Malta responsible for?
Infrastructure Malta is the government agency overseeing road development and infrastructure maintenance in Malta.

Why is Matthew Bongailas receiving government contracts controversial?
Bongailas has close ties to the Labour Party and received €1.4 million in contracts without an open tendering process.

How much did Infrastructure Malta spend on direct orders in 2024?
Between July and December 2024, Infrastructure Malta awarded €32 million in direct orders.

Why are direct orders problematic?
Direct orders bypass open competition, raising concerns about fairness, cost-effectiveness, and transparency.

Which companies have benefited from direct orders?
Firms like Bonnici Brothers, PTmatic Environmental Services, and Crowdnet received significant contracts.

Has Enemalta also issued direct contracts?
Yes, several companies received multimillion-euro contracts from Enemalta without public tenders.

What is the Capitainerie project scandal?
The project involved illegal construction in Ta’ Xbiex but the architect continues to receive public contracts.

Are there calls for reform?
Yes, opposition parties and transparency groups are demanding stricter procurement regulations.

How does the government justify these direct orders?
Government officials claim efficiency, but critics argue it lacks transparency and accountability.

What changes are being proposed?
Proposals include stronger oversight, mandatory competitive bidding, and independent investigations.