The PS coordinator in the TAP investigation commission said that there was never a refusal to hand over documents, arguing that now the facts must be investigated and only then political conclusions will be drawn.
This position was conveyed by the socialist deputy Bruno Aragão after this morning, in parliament, Chega, IL, BE, PCP, PAN and Livre criticized the Government’s contradictions regarding the possible existence of an opinion justifying the dismissal of the executive presidents and of the Council. from TAP Management, requiring further clarification from the executive.
In front of the journalists, the coordinator of the PS in the commission of investigation on the management of TAP maintained the thesis that, until now, “There has never been a refusal to deliver documents”.
TAP. The opposition criticizes the government’s contradictions regarding the dismissal of the CEO and accuses Costa of “hiding”
“The commission requested a set of documents, the Government responded to the commission, the commission understood that this response was not within its understanding and took action with the Government. This happened in the initial phase of the commission. We insisted with several entities so that they comply with the commission’s requests, ”he said.
At the press conference, Bruno Aragão never commented on the issue of the existence of apparent contradictions between the statements of the ministers Ana Catarina Mendes and Mariana Vieira da Silva, on the one hand, and the head of the Treasury portfolio, Fernando Medina , on the other side
“An investigation commission was created that must have all the conditions to exercise its mandate, asking for the documents it understands and listening to the people it understands. At the end of the in-depth study of the documents, the appropriate conclusions must be drawn, voted on and, in all serenity, give an answer to this process”, he stated.
Asked if the PS was also deceived in this commission of inquiry when asked about the existence of an opinion that would justify the dismissal of the executive presidents and the Board of Directors of TAP, Bruno Aragão replied: “The questions are certainly not posed as that”.
Who in the government is lying?
“The PS voted in favor, requested a set of documents that he does not know about – and, as such, cannot rule on them before knowing them. These documents are requested from a certain entity, be it the Government or another, and the treatment is exactly the same, ”he said.
Bruno Aragão later pointed out that, after the answers given to the different entities, “the investigation commission analyzes them and, if it does not agree, it must insist with the entity for that purpose.”
The commission of inquiry must be carried out with the defined rules and with the exemption. There is a big difference in relation to a permanent parliamentary commission ”, he underlined, pointing out then: The investigation commission“ is about what happened and not about what I would have liked to have happened ”.
“Regarding what happened, you have to investigate within the framework of what is possible in light of time and, in the end, then draw conclusions. These conclusions will later draw political consequences, ”he insisted.
Bruno Aragão tried to emphasize the basic principles that he said the PS defended: “Total exemption, defined rules, clarity in relation to committee procedures”.
“For the citizens there can be no doubts about what our mandate was and in relation to the conclusions. We have to separate what is the role of the Parliamentary Group and the deputies in this commission and the role of the Government in responding to the commission. Between the institutions, be it parliament, government or public administration entities, there is a healthy relationship, although, at times, there may be different understandings,” he added.
Layoffs at TAP. The opinion that did not exist, the minutes that the Government denied and that were given by those who own 1% of the company
The Government justified this Wednesday its refusal to send the legal opinions that supported the dismissal of the former executive president of the company to the TAP investigation commission with the need to “safeguard the public interest.”
In a note sent to the Lusa news agency, the office of the Vice Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Ana Catarina Mendes, alleges that “the opinion in question does not fall within the scope of the parliamentary commission of inquiry (CPI)” and “its disclosure implies risks in the legal defense of the State’s position.”
On Thursday, in a parliamentary hearing, the Minister of Finance, Fernando Medina, affirmed that there is “no additional opinion” that justifies the resignation of the ‘president’ and the president of the executive committee (CEO) of TAP beyond what results from the report of the General Treasury Inspectorate (IGF).
“There is no opinion, the idea that was created that there would be an opinion… there is no additional opinion to what is the basis to justify the dismissal, which is more than enough for those who read it, regarding the opinion of the General Inspectorate of Finance” said Fernando Medina.
Source: Observadora
