Most people thought they had heard all the arguments and counter arguments regarding the best way forward for Enemalta to provide an affordable, environmentally friendly and reliable source of electrical energy in the coming decade and beyond. But astonishingly, new worrying facts and allegations are cropping up.

John Pace, a former senior manager of Enemalta, opened a can of worms when he wrote to The Times.

He claimed that between 2003 and 2004 Malta missed a golden opportunity to have a reliable source of clean energy in the form of a natural gas pipeline. The Italian company ENI had offered to connect Malta to the pipeline that was being laid between Sicily and Libya as part of the Green Stream project.

Mr Pace claims that he and other engineers in Enemalta “welcomed this prospect, having had experience with coal, heavy fuel oil and gas”. Apparently Josef Bonnici, who was then politically responsible for Enemalta, supported this proposal. However, interest in this project allegedly cooled down when Austin Gatt took over as minister responsible for the energy utility.

The former Enemalta engineer made more astonishing comments when he said that the favourable conclusions made by an independent energy economist about the financial feasibility of this project were discarded at a political level.

More worryingly, Mr Pace claims that administrative changes made by Dr Gatt in Enemalta “resulted in the formation of a powerful lobby by the fuel oil importers who would stand to lose millions of euros if the power stations converted to gas”.

It is now being alleged that a substantial sum of money in commission was paid to a member of the fuel procurement committee appointed by Dr Gatt. This is a most serious allegation that needs to be properly investigated quickly and resolved.

Dr Gatt said “the decision (on the ENI proposal) had basically already been taken” when he became minister and that technically the whole Cabinet was politically and collectively responsible for this decision.

He also cast doubts on the economic feasibility of the ENI proposal and added “it wasn’t quite the time to change the power stations and make them gas-firing”.

The allegation about the possible negative influence of the “powerful lobby of fuel oil importers” was dismissed as “ridiculous” by Dr Gatt – even though he said he could not vouch for anyone – as oil procurement was decided “by a board headed by Roderick Chalmers”.

In the latest TV debate by the party leaders, Lawrence Gonzi reacted to Joseph Muscat’s comments on the issue of the ENI proposal by saying he had discarded this offer as “it was not in the country’s best interests because it would have tied Malta down for 25 years”.

Some pertinent questions are outstanding: why was such an important project not discussed in Parliament at the time? Why was the public kept in the dark about the ENI offer and only got to know about it 10 years later in the midst of an election campaign? Why was the feasibility study prepared by the Enemalta-commissioned energy economist never published?

It is not until these questions are answered, and the alleged corruption case is resolved in a transparent and satisfactory manner, that the matter can be resolved. People have a right to know the truth about this issue.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.