[ad_1]
Disagreements between S. Gentvilas and O. Vėbrienė arose when he removed the environmentalist, who, according to the media, previously informed the Minister about the oil spill at the Būtingė terminal late last year.
It has been reported in the media that he was removed from office because he shared official information about the spills at sea with third parties, namely Environment Minister Simon Gentville and his adviser.
However, in a meeting of the “peasant” faction on Thursday, O.Vėbrienė assured that things were not like that.
I informed the minister about the incident
“It has never been said from my lips that the minister is a third person, I do not know who came up with that headline, but it is very much in use at the moment. The officer collected information outside the office. It should be noted that he did not provide information about the event, because I informed the Minister about the event, ”he said.
O.Vėbrienė highlighted that said official collected information about the event outside of working hours.
“All information is investigative information and only the officers conducting the investigation can access it,” he said.
O.Vėbrienė explained that the official was unable to collect information himself, but directed it to colleagues who reportedly disclosed the information about the event to the heads of the Ministry of the Environment.
The department director said she had suspicions as to why the S. Gentville aide called that particular officer. According to her, the official, who was asked to explain his actions, reacted very angry, began to write letters to colleagues and the minister, in one of them he said that he knew the minister well and expected him to take action and punish O Vėbrienė.
Prosecutors were contacted about the amount of pollutants
Kęstutis Mažeika, a former Minister of the Environment, who appointed O. Vėbrienė as director of the AAD, asked if information on the amount of pollutants spilled in Būtingė could be hidden.
According to the AAD director, prosecutors in Klaipėda were contacted because the information could be withheld from the company.
“To calculate the damage fairly and correctly, we went to the Prosecutor’s Office so that with their help we could know the real amount,” he said.
He claims to have ordered not to resort to prosecutors again
O.Vėbrienė said that on the second or third day of the ministry, S. Gentvilas had summoned her to explain another topic: why there is a conflict with the Environmental Protection Agency.
“The minister called us to explain why he was approached by the prosecution, it was clearly said that there would be no such actions in the future. So that we find out inside, agree and don’t wear the clothes in public, “he said.
O. Vėbrienė said that he had told the Minister that he did not agree with that and that going to the prosecutors was a legal way to find out the situation.
“When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decided not to revoke the pollution permit after our formal appeal and we discovered that the operator had not complied with the mandatory order, we saw that this may be an act that is not in accordance with the law. , EPA may have exceeded their authority because the law “There is no such way, after the fact pointed out by our inspectors, the permit had to be revoked, we are in a situation where the prosecution or the court should say,” he said .
According to O.Vėbrienė, the prosecutor’s office recently assessed the EPA action as illegal and applied to the court to protect the public interest and request the revocation of the pollution permit.
The court ruling, he said, will set a precedent for the future.
Rapporteur status received
O.Vėbrienė recently reported on the Minister’s behavior requesting the Attorney General’s Office and receiving rapporteur status.
“I took action because I noticed that there is a possible attempt to weaken the state control over environmental protection. Seeing this, I could not stay on the sidelines, I sent all the information to the Attorney General,” said O. Vėbrienė at the meeting of “peasants “.
He said he saw a real threat that state environmental controls would be weakened.
“If you don’t mind and you don’t talk about it, it means you agree, I don’t agree,” he said.
O.Vėbrienė said that although the reform was carried out in 2018, he encountered a regrettable situation when he arrived at the department, so he undertook reforms and started from transparency. He said that three people were fired for not complying with the principles of transparency, and also pointed out that there was a case in which a pre-trial investigation was launched due to the pressure on the official. According to the head of the department, he opposed the establishment of the Immunity Division. He went on to say that he didn’t like the things listed and that reaction suggested “someone didn’t want transparency.”
Evaluated the activities of the department
The Environment Ministry has evaluated the department’s performance and says it has identified a number of irregularities in the hiring of bonuses and employee benefits.
The Minister, for his part, claimed to have received a disproportionate number of complaints from employees of the Department of Environmental Protection and to have himself initiated an official inspection to see if said environmentalist had been legally removed from his post. S. Gentvilas also raised the issue of establishing leadership positions in the personnel policy department.
[ad_2]
