Cynthia Busuttil
Rate revisions: One meeting, two versions
Unions yesterday declared victory in their battle against the new energy bills as confusion reigned last night over whether the regulator will be revising the bills that have already been issued.
While the 11 unions claimed to have been promised backdated adjustments by the Malta Resources Authority, the regulator categorically denied this.
In fact, MRA chairman Carmel Ellul told The Times that retroactivity is not even mentioned in the authority's law - raising doubts on whether the regulator has authority over these bills.
Still, the 11 unions, which have been battling the hike in electricity rates, stuck to their guns, insisting that during a meeting yesterday afternoon the MRA confirmed it would be calling on the government to retroactively change the tariffs, which were introduced on October 1.
In a statement issued late yesterday evening the MRA categorically denied that it had asked, or would ask, for any retroactive revisions or that it alluded to this with the unions. It said that in the next tariffs revision it would take into consideration the changes in Enemalta's costs, including oil prices and any fine-tuning of the tariffs.
When initially contacted by The Times over the unions' claim, Mr Ellul did not rule out retroactive changes. However, he later was unable to say whether the regulator was even able to call for backdated modifications.
Originally he said that if the authority found mistakes in the way the tariffs were calculated, they would need to discuss the way forward, adding that "retroactivity still has to be discussed".
But when asked to say specifically whether the authority could make the government refund consumers on old bills if mistakes were found, Mr Ellul was unable to answer. "The regulator regulates the future and not the past," he said.
The second conversation took place after the MRA issued an official denial of the unions' claims.
He could not give a clear answer on why the authority had not reviewed the tariffs before they came into force, saying only that the authority had regulated "under the conditions of the time".
Earlier, during a press conference, the teachers' union president John Bencini said the MRA confirmed it would revise the tariffs as from October 1 and called on people not to pay their bills until they receive a revised version.
"This was a saga full of confusion, with things done in an amateurish way. We expect those in power to give an account to the people who are receiving unjust bills," Mr Bencini said on behalf of all the unions.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
11 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
laurence schembri
Jan 31st 2009, 21:21
It will be interesting to know in which language these disscussions were held, because something must have been lost intranslation.
Joe Vella
Jan 31st 2009, 15:34
@ All
And the truth relies in here; "In fact, MRA chairman Carmenl Ellul told The Times that retroactivity is not even mentioned in the authority's law - raising doubts on whether the regulator has authority over these bills."
Guess the Unions got it wrong,or should I say the GWU got it wrong. We are no stupid, PN and PL supporters alike, we all know that the GWU have an agenda.
g.c.Forte
Jan 31st 2009, 15:29
Is there any respect to the people in the streets.....................1930 hrs. One T.V...... The Unions had a BIG win and somebody should take responsibility . 1945 hrs. Net T.V....... M.R.A denied what the Unions said. 2000 hrs.P.B.S........There was an agreement between the 11 unions and M.R.A. and the agreement was that both did not agreed................Qtajt qalbi f`dan il pajjiz .........Mr. John Bandi should be given" Gieh ir Republika" for his song "PAJJIZ TAL MICKEY MOUSE""................
rene joseph
Jan 31st 2009, 14:55
There is something seriously fishy going on. I can't believe that 11 unions got it wrong. there must be something up.
My preposition is that the MRA spit it out during the meeting - the unions rushed out to celebrate while the MRA was getting pawned down by the government.
But then again, shouldn't these meetings have minutes?
Joe Vassallo
Jan 31st 2009, 14:43
And yet the architects of this national farce, Gonzi and Gatt, are still going around as if this is not an issue at all.
Talk about ostriches.
And UHM? What does its leadership have to say – after all they agreed with the tariffs and pulled out of the alliance of Unions who were ready to fight on.
As for MRA – the top people should resign en masse – they have lost of credibility and therefore should have the decency to quit.
luke caruana
Jan 31st 2009, 14:23
What the heck is going on here? Someone is fibbing as happened with the case of the melita adverts on city gate. The company said that it had permission from the council and the council denied. Reminds me of the tower of Babel and we all know how that lot ended up.
the romans had a proverb which goes Quos Deus vult perdere prius dementat. Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad! very apt.
P.Cassar
Jan 31st 2009, 13:31
FOR ME IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT IT IS THE UNIONS WHO SHOULD BE BELIEVED BECAUSE 11UNIONS ARE NOT DEAF AND DUMB
BUT IT IS ALSO CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAPPENED AFTER THE MEETING AND MR ELLUL SHOULD BE CLEAR WITH US CONSUMERS.
HE IS PAID FROM OUR MONEYTO BE OUR CUSTODIAN NOT THE GOVT'S
R.Zammit
Jan 31st 2009, 12:55
I smell the invisible hand of a "Fidel Castro" or the like, intervening after the meeting (and agreement) took place. What a shame, on both the regulator and the dictator.
joe morana
Jan 31st 2009, 12:23
Oh! what a circus, oh! what a mess!!!!! Is Malta really an EU member state????? Same meeting- two versions!?! In my opinion the Malta Resources Authority interevened too late in the day to teh detriment of tis credibility.
History (i.e. teh W&E saga of 1998) seems to be repeating itself , only that the "actors" have swapted their respecdtive roles.
Regretabbly howver, nobody seems to have learnt anything from the past W&E saga .
Dusty William
Jan 31st 2009, 11:14
ONE Meeting! TWO versions! MALTA!
Andrew Gatt
Jan 31st 2009, 11:02
Were these people all at the same meeting, or what?? And now we'll be entertained with a week's worth of ping-pong.....statements, counter-statements, counter-counter-statements......denials, accusations, more statements......naturally, 3 different versions aired on TV and so on and on and on.
Totally unprofessional.