Labour makes a good start
The Nationalists were caught by evident surprise at the relative soundness of Labour’s proposals to provide water and electricity at cheaper tariffs.
That was clear from the way various spokesmen tripped over their feet to try to dismiss the proposals before they had even read them.
Very quickly they said they were a gimmick. But the unanimous non-political reaction was that a gimmick they were not.
Rather the proposals present a serious effort to shift energy provision on to a new gas-fired basis. It is not a perfect proposal. But there is much to recommend it.
For one thing, it would allow Malta to be dependent on itself for adequate provision. That said, should the Sicilian interconnector possibility become available at affordable financing, it could be incorporated in Labour’s proposal.
The Prime Minister’s reaction was the most confused of all. From an initial gimmick dismissal, he quickly moved to assert that a Nationalist government could also supply cheaper energy. The Finance Minister tried to be the most professional of the critical troika.
The new deputy leader started with a squeaky ‘gimmick’ and was stuck there. He did not get a quick briefing from those who knew better and therefore had nothing better else to say.
The former Nationalist minister Michael Falzon does know better. He immediately said it was no gimmick and proceeded to make objective critcism. That rests on the timeline the Opposition leader has given himself to implement the proposal.
Two years does seem to be a short span. The Opposition leader recognised that and made it clear he was putting a strain on himself on purpose.
If Labour is elected to govern and so push comes to shove, he would be doing the shoving personally with the aid of an energy minister. In that scenario he would need to do a lot of shoving.
Aside from the natural difficulties inherent in the process, the Nationalist opposition would be doing its utmost to hinder the Labour government. A new way would have to be found to spell the word negative.
Other worthwhile crticisms were made by a former chairman of Enemalta. The Opposition leader had a reply to them too.
The Government was visibly angry that the Labour Opposition could put forward a spokesman of a Dutch firm helping the Government to back its proposals. It was also chagrined because the proposal involves no mystery or miracle.
It could have been worked out by the Government itself if it had not been so obsessed, for some reason still to be revealed, to push ahead with the dirty fuel scheme recently put into halting practice, emitting smoke from some mysterious fire which the auditor general could not locate.
That fact will probably unveil fresh suspicions in the future. Many decent Nationalists will be saying if Labour could plan all this from the barrenness of Opposition, why could not the Government have done it from the well-endowed operating grounds of formal office?
The question begs an answer. The thought of some sort of hanky panky will raise its head again. It might be still a bit too early for that. But, it will happen.
The questions will not only come from decent Nationalists but also from the constituted bodies, who have already sounded positive to Labour’s proposal, and from the business community, which together with households recognises that the expense of production of energy, irrespective of the independent price of the fuel input on the interna-tional market, is of paramount importance in their cost structure.
There is much more to discuss. And discussed it will be before the election date arrives, and thereafter, should Labour win.
But the discussion will be on the basis of a factor that the Nationalists have lost in recent months – credibility.
Whatever its final shape, the Labour proposal is credible. So much so that already the Nationalists are moving to try to make it their own. The poeople will not be so easily had.
Many will notice too the unmitigated arrogance of the Prime Minister who rushed to demand that Labour makes available to him all the details of the plan – who drew it up, who would be involved, and such like. That is rich coming from the head of a government who himself was very often chary of giving information he was in duty bound to give. Not a few will remember the shadiness of the current Delimara project and how determined Government was not to give details.
For that and other projects the official line was, invariably, that commercial confidentiality prevented the Government from opening the pages of all the books.
Now the Prime Minister wants his adversary to be so gallant as to do his bidding. As a matter of fact, on the very first day the Opposition had given much more information, location, type, estimates and all than had the Government in similar cases which made it formally accountable to Parliament.
The Labour Party has opened the election campaign with a bang. It is only the start, though the key issue at this stage. It would do well to go by the line of credibility it has established and to make sure that the trait runs through all its proposals.
The Government, which will concentrate on its claim that the economy has done very well, ignoring Himalayan height of the public debt, will have enough gimmicks of its own to produce.
The Labour Party’s initial success is not going to make the Nationalist Party any less negative than it had already sworn to be.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
25 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
B Azzopardi
Jan 14th, 16:44
Very unbiased article..NOTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Expected better from you Lino being an economist and all!
Mark Spiteri
Jan 14th, 13:15
i would have expected an economist such as yourself to ask for calculations before coming to your conclusion.....why doesn't Labour want to show its calculations?
Giov DeMartino
Jan 14th, 08:48
X'jasal biex jaghmel bniedem ghall-ambizzjoni personali tieghu. X'irgulija rgulija!
David Farrugia
Jan 13th, 20:33
to all PN lackeys commenting here...who are the experts shooting down the PL proposals? Please list the experts not some amateur minster.
ronald mifsud
Jan 13th, 19:37
bullocks. All those who have expressed support to Muscat's power station project are all Labour eyed boys or disguised labour sympathisers. Be a gentleman for once! After all what do you expect from an ex-labour minister!
Eddy Privitera
Jan 14th, 08:28
Ronald Mifsud: Do you consider University Professors, Jesmond Mugliett, Dr. Franco Debono, KEMA - the same consultancy company used by GonziPN on energy consultancy, unions such as UHM, MHRA etc.. as "labour eyed boys or disguised labour sympathisers " ??? How the do you consider those who criticized the plan , namely GonziPN ?????????????????
Tony Agius
Jan 13th, 17:40
As an ex finance Minister, people expect better comments from you about this scrap paper,how is this (plan) supported? it has BIG financial mistakes and BIG BIG mistakes in the time-Lag. People do not take Konrad's word or Joseph's word for these lies.It will not be like Love at first site, people want proof , and now , not one or two weeks before Elections.
Edgar Gambin
Jan 13th, 17:14
Mr. Spiteri, are you the same person who resigned as minister because Alfred Sant introduced CET instead of VAT behind your back. Not even you as Minister was informed about the froga in the oven. You want us to believe Joseph Muscat without him telling us how he arrived at the conclusions to build a new power station. Where is your credibility?
Carmel Camilleri
Jan 13th, 16:14
Lino is it possible that you did not learn from the VAT experience. Pity you are not contending the election and made Minister for energy. Surely you would resign from your Ministry again..
Then you first kept quite and accepted everything as a loyal labourite but subsequently there remained only one option for you to resign just to save yourself from the whole flop. I admire you loyalty.
Carmel Serracino-inglott
Jan 13th, 16:13
This is a comment to try to save the face of Labour. I do not agree with LINO , not a all . LP campaign is far from a bang. A proposal half baked , as usual, like Maltese becoming all Swisslike. Most experts have said their say. I beg you read them well and then conclude. Lino , maybe, did not have all the experts opinion before going to press. LS writing is purely in defence of wishful ideas.
Edward Mallia
Jan 13th, 18:07
May we have a list of these "experts" please? And may we be informed of their political background ? I ask for this after being involved in a Dissett prog. on PBS repeatedly billed as having a panel of "independent experts". On arriving for the recording we found that a fourth member -- a Perm. Sec. in a Ministry -- had been added on. Hardly "independent". WE had to declare our independence.
ANTHONY PAVIA
Jan 14th, 10:50
Profs, trying to be apolitical here is like trying to extract blood out of stone.
Monica Muscat
Jan 13th, 15:46
Sorry Mr. Spiteri. I usally read twice thru your articles as I enjoy your methodical and analyistic mode of writing and your - good English. Not less the always interesting Headings - make you interested. This time, however, I was surprised by the unacronistic header! What you term a "good start" - to me is a "poor show" - if you go by the TV discussions we were fed these last days!
J Cutajar
Jan 13th, 14:26
Proset Sur Spiteri artiklu tajjeb hafna minn persuna professjonali.
J Martinelli
Jan 13th, 14:06
@ Pavia & Spiteri
Deep down both of you must feel a tinge of guilt, a bit of shame and a pinch of envy.
1. The NP has always maintained that tariffs would be reduced when circumstances permit.
2. The NP had and has solid ideas how to lower tariffs. They are: The inter-connector, the financing of a gas pipeline and thus the conversion of the PS.
Labour didn't have a good start, a contraire. Cont
ANTHONY PAVIA
Jan 14th, 10:48
You really must be on a high. Is it the Canadian climate?
J Martinelli
Jan 13th, 14:04
@ Pavia & Spiteri Pt II
Their start amounted to a farce, patched up job & they even managed to dupe the consultants who they had hired. The resulting 'hidden report' did not include the ancillary infrastructure required to make their proposal workable! But the most insulting of all was that the net, net price of 9.6c was even higher than the NP plan already partly in place. Cont...
J Martinelli
Jan 13th, 14:03
@ Pavia & Spiteri Pt III
Worse is the fact that Labour's plan does not qualify for one euro cent in financial assistance. It is a clear maneuver to steer away from the EU who Joseph, 4 years after becoming leader had reluctantly admitted that 'EU membership had been good'.
One questions why Laburisti, will not stop treating the public with such contempt and a former minister should know better!
Edward Mallia
Jan 13th, 17:35
As usual wires crossed. Min. Fenech said that the EU is helping Malta and Cyprus to join the E. gas grid. A an atlas will show that no pipeline can reach Cyprus; Cyprus is building an LNG terminal. So the EU should help us as well. In any case the post-2014 budget is stalled; we have no promised sum yet. Which is why govt. is predicting such long time scales, 2/3 times normal for Med. pipes.
Tony Agius
Jan 13th, 13:31
@ Lino
The fact that you consider this proposal as a good one, really surprise me,The only thing considered in this proposal is fishing for votes among those who know nothing about what it takes to be done and financed, but you surely do know, and that is why I am surprised with your comments. Most poeple know that there are big hidden expenses,big mistakes in the time-lag...ecc....ecc...........
Karm Farrugia
Jan 13th, 12:37
Sober reflections on a WHITE PAPER from the Opposition. An innovation forsooth.
Saviour Cachia
Jan 13th, 12:34
I agree 100% with Lino about the Labour's proposal on cheaper tariffs for electricity and water. What I saw ironic in this first week of the election campaign, the P Mr stooping so low as to suggest where the leader of the L P, should contest his second district. Such remarks does not give Lawrence much credibility, Malta taghna lkoll, we expect better, more positive and sound proposals.
ANTHONY PAVIA
Jan 13th, 12:28
"That fact will probably unveil fresh suspicions in the future. Many decent Nationalists will be saying if Labour could plan all this from the barrenness of Opposition, why could not the Government have done it from the well-endowed operating grounds of formal office?"
EXACTLY!!
John Camilleri
Jan 13th, 13:38
Plan! What plan. It is a PowerPoint presentation that is not back up by any studies. If the studies and the plan were so good MLP would have published them along with the presentation.
Wally Vella-Zarb
Jan 13th, 18:28
@ John Camilleri
" If the studies and the plan were so good MLP would have published them along with the presentation."
You mean like GonziPN did with MidMed, BWSC, Arriva, St Philips Hospital, etc?
Please choose the reason of your report below: