Oil price too low for a surcharge - Muscat
At the current price of oil, the surcharge on energy bills should be zero, Labour leader Joseph Muscat said yesterday, pointing out that there had been no extra charge when crude last fell to $42 per barrel.
He reiterated the calculations released by the Labour Party in the past weeks, saying that with slipping oil prices it did not make sense to increase the surcharge on energy bills from the current 95 per cent to an equivalent of 185 per cent.
His comments, made yesterday at a party activity in Paola, come as the international price of crude oil dropped below $42 per barrel, its lowest since January 2005.
The last time oil prices had been this low Malta did not even have a surcharge, he argued, accusing the Prime Minister of creating uncertainty in the country especially because he introduced the utility tariffs retroactively from October 1, without the meters being read.
Dr Muscat maintained that the new tariffs were not being introduced because of high oil prices but to cover inefficiencies and the government's waste.
"How can it be that when fuel prices are falling all over Europe, a new tax on fuel is being imposed in Malta?"
He accused the Prime Minister of confusing matters in the latest revision of energy bills which Lawrence Gonzi negotiated with the unions.
"When he negotiated with the unions he said one thing but when the government made its final offer the terms had changed," he said, in support of a number of trade unions which are still questioning the government's latest proposals.
Dr Muscat kept his criticism focused on the Prime Minister for most of his speech, saying Dr Gonzi had lately disappeared except to tell people about the plans for the regeneration of Valletta.
Soon he would appear again as the knight in shining armour to halt the heavily criticised proposed new road at Għadira, he continued. "But we expect things to be done right the first time."
On the latest plans to rebuild City Gate and the old Opera House on fresh designs by world-known Italian architect Renzo Piano, Dr Muscat said the projects are welcome but long overdue.
They should have been completed years ago, he said, adding that he expected more consultation on the matter rather than just a phone call from the Prime Minister to say an architect had been appointed.
In fact, Dr Muscat complained about lack of consultation on a number of issues such as the public transport reform on which the bus drivers themselves were not consulted.
The government, he said, should look after consumers' interests instead of creating a private monopoly like it did with the gas division of Enemalta.
In the government's plans for public transport reform nothing had been said about how the consumers would be protected from price hikes.
Referring to the e-mail PN secretary general Paul Borg Olivier sent to Cabinet members asking them to forward personal data of people who had complained at ministries, Dr Muscat said Dr Gonzi was ultimately responsible for a "web of espionage".
The e-mail was mistakenly sent to PL secretary general Jason Micallef and was published on Thursday morning.
Dr Muscat said no attempts to find a sacrificial lamb would hide the fact that Dr Gonzi should shoulder responsibility since he knew about the mechanism being proposed.
In response to the publication of this e-mail, the PN said the data collected would only be accessible to the Office of the Prime Minister and would only involve the transfer of complaints from the party or the ministries to the government and not vice versa.
But Dr Muscat said that even if the personal data collected would only move from the ministries to Castille, there were still experts who were of the opinion that this could be in breach of data protection law.
Adding insult to injury, the e-mail showed that at least 15 public officials went to the PN headquarters for instructions from Dr Borg Olivier during working hours, to establish this data-sharing mechanism, he said.
"Now they threaten to take me to court for publishing the e-mail. Take me to court. We need to say these things," he insisted.
Reacting to Dr Muscat's speech, the PN said he played to the gallery on the City Gate and Opera House issue. It was disappointed that he had not issued proposals on the transport reform and accused the Labour Party of dealing in personal data of citizens on a regular basis.
7 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
D Vella
Dec 9th 2008, 12:41
I agree totally, the Government should offset the negative effects of the present hedging agreement for purchase of oil (at $120 a barrel incidentally) by entering into a new hedging agreement for a further period based on the current falling price. That way everybody gains.
The problem is that Dr. Muscat is trying to give the impression that with every daily drop in the price of oil Government can reduce the price of energy tariffs and fuel forecourt prices overnight. It just doesn't work that way . . . even he is more intelligent than to believe (or convince us of) such simplistic rubbish!!
lgalea
Dec 8th 2008, 21:06
D Vella
If it was purchased as was said by Gonzipn, i.e. for six months, why did Gonzipn again increase diesel and petrol prices several times during the six-month period?
martin Saliba
Dec 8th 2008, 20:34
@ D. Vella.
Why are you defending a goverment that is stealing money out of your pocket? You said that the oil we are consuming today was bought at a price of 100 dollars. Have you forgotten that
the goverment was raising the price of fuel according to the world oil market when we were consuming exixting stock bought at a cheaper rate? The goverment will keep up with this arogant attitude as long as there are dimwits like you to defend it. Before you start assuming my political status let me tell you that i support only one party that goes by the name of "Martin Saliba's pocket"
Denis Catania
Dec 8th 2008, 20:07
@D Vella: The surcharge can and should be stopped now. Simply by buying enough oil to average out the price. The one year worth of oil that LawrencePN claimed they bought, is already being used. If you purchase 2 or 3 years worth of oil on top of that. There is no reason why the surcharge shouldn't stop immediately.
Charles Vassallo
Dec 8th 2008, 19:14
@ D.Vella
Agreed! The current surcharge should be kept until the present stock runs out. Subsequently the Government should remove the surcharge totally considering the current prices.
Cedric Busuttil
Dec 8th 2008, 18:42
@ D Vella. You are perfectly right and I perfectly agree with you. But there is always a but. So, can't we do a bulk buy right now so that in the future we will have costless bills?? The truth is that even if we do we will still have to pay the same tariffs!! The price of buying is just a part of the high cost tariffs. Other problems are wages, wastages, theft, manning etc etc etc.....
What we pay now is a simple sum of 1+1+1+1....... . I believe oil price is just a 1 of a big long never ending sum.
D Vella
Dec 8th 2008, 18:03
Is Dr. Muscat still trying to make people believe that Malta goes to the 'market' every couple of days and buys a few litres of oil . . . for crying out loud! The oil we are currently burning now to produce our energy was purchased at over $100 a barrel . . . why can't some prople get their heads around that??