Oil myths

It seems that all members of Parliament, except for one, are quite reluctant to discuss oil extraction in detail. Not only because many of our MPs lack the necessary technical background, but it is widely acknowledged that making gratuitous statements to lever expectations is no longer the order of political stake.

The only one who seems to be overwhelmed, yet seemingly reliably informed about the whole matter, is none other than the Labour whip, who from time to time while debating in Parliament, finds it fit to make a couple of assertions considered to be worthy of note.

For successive years, the Labour MP has consistently reiterated that the Nationalist government is guided by a well-thought strategy that would only bring the subject of oil extraction in the public domain when an election is nearing. While stating that he has reliable evidence that oil can be viably extracted from the Maltese territories, he takes the government to task for "intentionally" failing to accomplish this task.

Which leads me to ask: Why would the government deliberately want to fail in its mission to extract oil when, at the same time, the Nationalist government is being accused of bringing the subject of oil extraction into the public domain in an effort to raise hopes each time an election is nearing? Which politician in his right senses would not want to make such an unprecedented accomplishment?

He also accuses the government of choosing the incorrect extraction methods. On an even more serious note, it is alleged that sums of money were paid to ensure that tests were conducted in an inappropriate manner.

What concrete evidence is there to suggest that extraction methods were conducted in an inappropriate manner? If this were the case, and sums of money were paid to achieve this purpose, who received the money? What could be behind this perverse logic?

At one point, the Labour spokesman states that there have been people who unduly managed to obtain very sensitive documents. What are these sensitive documents all about? How do these documents feature in this whole saga?

The Labour MP goes on to state that he is informed that the PN government intends to conduct 2D seismic surveys in order to resume its efforts in the near future, claiming that 2D surveys are not considered to be the optimal survey method.

If the government wants to fail in its mission, why would it opt to conduct even more surveys? On the other hand, if 2D seismic surveys prove to be ineffective, which surveying methods are considered to be most effective in the circumstances?

The saga continues. We are reminded of an agreement which Malta reached with Tunisia last March 6, whereby both countries agreed to undertake joint exploration in line with a strategic agreement. Yet, he finds it fit to ask why the Libyans ruled out any cooperation with Malta, underlining further at some point that interested people have now lost confidence in this government since the government has "lost the opportunity".

The conclusion is even more moving! To prove his point, he promised the country that, once Labour is re-elected to government, he will step down from office should the country fail to accomplish its task in extracting crude oil from its territories.

By far this is the strongest declaration from any Maltese politician in many months! It seems that the oil myth, which has been with us for successive years, will be drawing towards an end once Labour is re-elected. If the honourable MP is taken seriously, Labour can rest assured it would win the next election - however not before the electorate is regaled with the right answers!

Mr Musumeci, an architect by profession, is mayor of Siggiewi and a candidate for the Nationalist Party on the sixth and seventh electoral districts.

rmperiti@onvol.net