GRTU explains position on petrol station owners, gas distribution
The GRTU said this afternoon it failed to understand why the Consumers’ Association makes wild and defamatory statements with regard to petrol station owners.
Yesterday, the association questioned the agreement reached between the Malta Resources Authority and petrol station owners and said that never before had trade sectors been compensated to reach the required standards.
It said it seemed that the deal would ultimately see the people covering most of the costs for petrol pumps to be upgraded.
But the GRTU said the statement was “full of misinformation in a futile effort to discredit GRTU as the national representative of micro, small and medium businesses”.
It said that the price of petrol and other fuels was government determined through the Malta Resources Authority (MRA), the reason being that there still existed one dominant supplier.
This meant that the profit margin of petrol station owners as retailers of fuels is fixed.
While in a free market petrol station owners would negotiate the price with the supplier, estimate the cost of their service up to the standards established at law and set the price to consumers, in Malta this could not be done without reference to the MRA.
The GRTU said that this time round, besides the standard costs increase exercise, a special additional exercise needed to be effected due to the new EU regulations, enacted so that consumers and the community were better protected and offered a better overall service by petrol stations.
Heavy new investment, needed to be bought by each petrol station, an investment per petrol station determined by the MRA at €26 million.
GRTU members already committed more then €6 million from their own pockets and the MRA, Enemalta and GRTU have agreed on the roadmap that would lead to an agreement.
“It maybe that some costs in the whole supply change will have to be reviewed or it may be that prices have to be upped...”
“The important thing is that things are not done haphazardly or as CA insinuated by collision between a monopsony (GRTU representing all resellers of fuels) and a monopoly (Enemalta Corporation) without the intervention of a public regulator (MRA) that protects consumers.”
On gas distribution, the GRTU said distributors operated under a licence and according to conditions awarded to them under a legally binding contract.
As successors of Enemalta Liquigas knew about this contract.
Referring to the €25 deposit which had been introduced to induce customers from unnecessarily hoarding cylinders, the GRTU said that most households never paid this amount for their cylinders.
The GRTU said it believed that in giving customers returning a cylinder without a receipt €5, Liquigas was being fair and Easygas’s way out of the hurdle was to lower the deposit on its own cylinders from €25 to €5 and make it easy for customers who so desired to switch supplier.
Easygas should also think seriously of giving consumers a better price on their cylinders and provide the 12kg cylinders, the one that most consumers bought.
GRTU said that while it was always willing to explain to all when contacted, it could not waste time with bloggers, and others who just hit out at the GRTU emotionally.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
'No need for early election if PM's...
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
12 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Charles Zammit
Jan 1st 2011, 10:43
“The GRTU said this afternoon it failed to understand why the Consumers’ Association makes wild and defamatory statements with regard to petrol station owners.” Look who is criticising someone else's statements. When anybody's statements are not to the tune of the administration of the GRTU it is immediately savagely labelled.
The GRTU which calls itself the “CHAMBER” of small businesses seems to be more inclined in protecting cartels through “INDISTRIAL ACTION” and arm twisting tactics rather than through negotiation. All this happens to the detriment of free competition and the free market philosophy. I have yet to come across a so called “business chamber” that represents employers along with self employed and that calls upon its sectional members to strike against the interests of the same employers and businesses it represents. Having said that when government gives in to the GRTU cartel promotion techniques it would be betraying the interests of the country and its citizens.
Finally I fully support Mr. Leone Ganado's initiative and also pledge 20 euro for this just cause.
c.f. tabone
Jan 1st 2011, 08:24
With all respect to all those involved, I don't think that I have ever been given a receipt for my gas cylinders.
albert leone ganado
Dec 31st 2010, 17:59
I may be wrong but in my opinion any arrangement by MRA or government to support the upgrading of privately owned petrol stations to EU standards goes totally against the EU principles and pillars of fair competition. The GRTU threats should be just ignored for its concept of business competition beggars belief. If any petrol owner is unwilling to make the necessary investment he should renounce his licence. However we must generate public awareness and put pressure on government to resist these outrageous demands of petrol pump owners. Perhaps we should encourage and support the Consumer Association in engaging a top European lawyer to start a class action within the European competition and legal structures on behalf of the Maltese car owner and petrol consumer. Of course this will cost money. May I as a very concerned blog commentator start the ball rolling by pledging 20 euro to this campaign. I hope many others will follow in supporting the consumer association for we need immediate effective action rather than empty talk which will gets us nowhere other than forcing us to empty our wallets at the petrol pumps.
anthony
Dec 31st 2010, 18:22
I could not agree with you more i will give 20 euro no problem
Sean Grima
Dec 31st 2010, 17:40
vince farrugia has FAILED to explain the necessity of taking action to stop distribution of gas and fuel, to the detriment of the consumer. as the times rightly said, this is using the consumer as a pawn, and is unethical and irresponsible. if the GRTU has a dispute with the government, it should discuss it around a table or take legal action.
nobody is arguing about the merits of the GRTU's claims....what we are saying is that the way to voice those merits is to do so in the proper forum, not paralyse a country.
m.fenech
Dec 31st 2010, 16:55
d big news is that from next Monday we will have another massive increase
F. Attard
Dec 31st 2010, 16:48
Vince says (in defence of Liquigas) that the €25 deposit were introduced to induce customers from unnecessarily hoarding, while at the same time suggsting to Easygas to charge only €5!
Also, while preaching open competition, at the same time it has been defending the monopoly of gas distributors in a given area. I can choose my breadseller, grocer, vegetable halker etc, but not the gas distributor.
The GRTU is no longer credible nor convincing.
C. Borg
Dec 31st 2010, 16:41
Why should the public bear the costs of updating of the petrol station. Why because the market is not liberalized.
If this was true that the GRTU should fight tooth and nail that fuel supplies should be liberalized, as has been promised by the Government ages ago but despite pressures from the EU, nothing happened.
With regards to deposits on tanks, Vince Farrugia knows very well that according to Vat regulations, gas suppliers are not required by law to give a receipt. So if he is saying the opposit, he is not saying the truth.
Regarding bloggers, these are comments by the general public. So ignoring them is ignoring how the people feel. Please don't give us another ''Austin Gatt'' please.
E. Azzopardi
Dec 31st 2010, 16:37
Last comment for 2010. Any public contracts ( and public means" the people, the taxpayers) should be made as such, that is PUBLIC. When somebody, anybody, says that he/she does not want this to be public, then my personal opinion is that I smell a rat. And I am sure that I am not alone on this one. I am not referring to this contract in particular.
Therefore, for goodness sake tell the people, inform them , communicate with them. Isn't this what it is all about?
T Camilleri
Dec 31st 2010, 16:24
No one believes you any longer Cens.
john micallef
Dec 31st 2010, 16:17
Since when Vince Farrugia has turned to be the speaker of Liquigas??
More than ever before Cens, how can we take you serious? if you are like a pink pong ball all the time?!
Joseph Stafrace
Dec 31st 2010, 16:04
According to the GRTU; it is the national representative of micro, small and medium businesses, does this include Liquigas! It seems so because it is doing its best to justify their line of action.