Michel Spiteri, St Julians
Utilities charge for Catholic schools unfair
Austin Gatt, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Communications, states, with reference to the proposed hike in water and electricity tariffs, that "What we consume, we have to pay for." (October 7).
Yet, I find the fact that charging a commercial rate to organisations offering a service for free to the local community, a contradiction of this statement.
Could someone, or maybe the minister himself, enlighten me on why Catholic schools, which provide an invaluable service, at a very cheap cost to the government, are charged commercial rates for the water and electricity they consume?
A school which does not charge students for the service it delivers is not a commercial entity and I cannot understand how it can be labelled as such. It is the parents of children who attend these schools who are paying these bills through the donations they give.
These parents are being forced to subsidise Enemalta as well as the telephone companies since this service is also charged at a commercial rate.
Dr Gatt also states that the government last year gave "€68 million to Enemalta in subsidies". I'm curious to know how much Church schools paid Enemalta last year and how much of that was an extra charge, or should I say subsidy, slapped on them because someone who has no idea what "commercial" means has labelled them so. This is nothing short of daylight robbery of the parents' hard-earned cash.
5 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Louis Attard
Oct 12th 2008, 08:07
There are perfectly good Government schools these children could attend.If you choose to send your child to a fee paying private school,then you must be prepared to pay the going fee. A commercial entity must pay commercial rates. Why should it be subsidised by the taxpayers? .Donations are a fee by any other name. Stop playing with words.
Joe Vassallo
Oct 11th 2008, 21:35
At the end of the day the new tariffs are the result of the Govt’s sheer incompetence, in this case in developing alternative sources of energy, as well as the management of Enemalta and WSC themselves.
Scandinavian countries, and others such as Holland, have made tremendous leaps forward in the harnessing of natural energy sources, including solar, and they hardly have any sunshine for most of the year. Yet our pathetic Govt has spent the last 20 years literally wasting away taxpayers’ money.
Enemalta were boasting that they actually installed photovoltaic cells on a couple of office roofs, wow, big deal.
Dr. Gonzi committed himself to wind turbines in the sea, totally disregarding the depth of water around us. We have a Govt made up of incompetents who think that as long as they make a statement here and there, then their job is done. Wake up guys!
Joe Tabone-Adami
Oct 11th 2008, 16:23
On the one hand, Mr Spiteri is right to point out this anomaly. A similiar anomaly still exists, unless I am mistaken, in considering churches also as "commerical entities" as regards energy consumption. On the other hand, Government 'charitable' institutions (like hospitals) also subjected to the "pay for consumption" principle. There appear, therefore, fair and good grounds for the principle to be applied to one and all.
l Galea
Oct 11th 2008, 16:05
You could always choose to send your children to Government schools and you will not be asked to pay these bills.
But perhaps some want to be more equal than others or suffer from an inverted inferiority complex and do not want their children to mix with the common peoples children.
Franco Farrugia
Oct 11th 2008, 11:52
I fully concur with the opinion of Mr Michel Spiteri.
All the more reason to avoid all kinds of waste of electricity in Church school buildings, don't you think?