Unions to challenge Gonzi on new tariffs

A number of trade unions are accusing Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi of twisting figures and blowing out of proportion the number of families who will benefit from the eco-reductions on the new water and electricity rates.

The unions will in the coming days present a letter to Dr Gonzi challenging the scientific veracity of the figures he had presented to them in talks over the new tariffs.

The government had said that 73 per cent of families will benefit from these reductions since their average consumption is below the 1,700 unit threshold.

However, the unions are arguing that this average was not based on the number of families but on how many bills were issued, and included around 50,000 vacant houses and summer residences.

"The main point of contention is that while there are around 140,000 families, the government is calculating the average household consumption on 190,000 bills, and it is, therefore, including 50,000 unoccupied houses," Malta Union of Midwives and Nurses, Paul Pace told The Times, yesterday.

General Workers' Union deputy secretary general Geitu Mercieca added that there were discrepancies between the figures initially presented by Dr Gonzi and those given during the meeting with auditors KPMG. "The Prime Minister presented us with incorrect information which could have easily misled us," Mr Mercieca charged.

"The aim of the government was mainly to destabilise the ratio in its favour. We do not think it makes sense to add 50,000 accounts to the equation when in actual fact they are not all-year round residential."

Economist Edward Scicluna was the expert appointed by a number of unions to check the latest figures.

"Having carried out a scientific study for the unions, I can confirm that their fears were confirmed," he said, when contacted yesterday.

Prof. Scicluna said the chairman of the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development had asked him to undertake a study with another expert to see how people in the lower income brackets would be affected by the removal of the free 600 units, and whether a voucher system for these 30,000 persons would be effective to protect the vulnerable in society.

Prof. Scicluna hoped that if common sense prevailed this need not become another storm in a tea cup.

"With some tweaking and goodwill on both sides the scheme can and should be made equitable and would not cost the government or Enemalta a significant sum."

He felt the Malta Resources Authority had to speak up now to give its opinion on the controversy of how this cost-recovery exercise could be undertaken fairly.

He reiterated the unions' calls for a socio-economic impact assessment to see whether the new tariffs should be introduced now, postponed or implemented gradually.

The debate on the tariffs has been raging for weeks and culminated in a street protest which saw all the unions joining forces. Dr Gonzi met the unions after this protest in a bid to iron out the situation but after the final figures were given just two of the unions agreed to the new proposals: Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin and the Confederation of Malta Trade Unions.

Reacting to the negative statements by the other unions, UĦM general secretary Gejtu Vella said "playing with figures will not solve anything".

He argued this all boiled down to something very simple: the people had to pay the real price for water and electricity, and everybody should try and cut down on waste as much as possible.

"The government has acceded to some of the most important requests made by the unions, and therefore the criticism of the other unions is unfounded. They are just picking on unnecessary details which will not change anything," he said.

"We all have to change our usage patterns to cope with the lack of subsidies," he said.

The Infrastructure Ministry and the Office of the Prime Minister were unavailable for a comment yesterday.