The Prime Minister’s statement that the floating storage unit for gas will be a temporary presence in the Marsaxlokk harbour until a permanent gas pipeline is in place is no consolation to someone like myself who is expected, during the coming Mepa board meeting, to shoulder responsibility on whether this project should be given the green light.

Roberto Vaccari states in the Environment Impact Assessment report that an accident with “devastating effects” can occur once in every 10,000 years. Indeed, this may seem to be a very long time compared to the human lifespan, but what if an accident happens within the time window when the floating storage unit happens to be in operation inside Marsaxlokk?

Having a voting right on the Mepa board carries great responsibility. Each vote must be based on a well-informed opinion, on facts and mindful of the major impact and associated risks. Any voting member should be asking, first and foremost, whether this is the safest option available. All other issues, including having cheaper electricity rates, are of a secondary nature, whether we like it or not.

This project has been shrouded in secrecy ever since it was first proposed. The release of the preliminary study for the development of consultation zones in the Delimara peninsula, drawn up by George Papadakis, was only published after a persistent request by the major stakeholders, the Opposition included.

It later emerged that another report, this time by Italian expert Maffezzoli, has been kept under wraps. According to Occupational Health and Safety Authority head Mark Gauci, it was not necessary to publish this report as “in isolation, it means nothing”.

In my days as an engineering student at University, I was taught to adopt a critical approach to the conclusions presented in reports.

While politicians come and go, the impact of their decisions remain

The validity of the Maffezzoli report, to my mind, is a decision I ought to take following a thorough assessment of the report itself. As such, I find this attitude and style of approach by a senior public officer in charge of a leading authority as truly unbecoming in a modern, democratic state.

It is, however, all the more striking that this government is expecting me to pass a positive judgement on this project, based on a preliminary report. Here again, Gauci states that this was necessary since a safety report including mitigating features would eventually be presented once the final design for the plant is decided upon. Presenting the final design after the Mepa vote is taken is, to me, unacceptable.

How can I be expected to vote in favour of a project without knowing what safety measures are to be adopted? Why is this half-baked project being put to a vote at a stage when a number of issues remain unaddressed?

The Papadakis preliminary report assumes no ignition point will be present in the immediate vicinity of the floating storage unit. Although assumptions may be an intrinsic part of the scientific world, they ought to be realistic. Is it a realistic scenario for the identified zones to remain ignition-free? As this is most certainly not possible, a report is necessary, in time for the public hearing, which does not assume the area surrounding the unit is an ignition-free zone.

The mitigated measures in Livorno’s case included a 22-kilometre offshore berthing, with a 3.2-kilometre radius no-go zone during vessel-to-vessel feed-in. Given that the possibility of a leak increases during feed-ins, enforcing a no-go zone becomes imperative.

While this may be achieved in Livorno’s case, this would hardly be possible in Marsaxlokk, as depicted in the map provided. The activity in the immediate vicinity, the movements in the harbour, Marsaxlokk, Birżebbuġa and the Freeport terminal make this impossible to enforce.

A matter which seems to have been overlooked is our country’s vulnerability. With the Marsa plant destined to shut down sometime soon, we will be left with just one plant, that in Delimara. No matter how rare it may be, an accident with “devastating effects” may leave the island-state destitute for months. Although the probability is small, the associated risks are substantial.

One should ask, why has the government, in view of our nation’s vulnerability, not considered a safer option, such as that adopted for the FSRU Toscana in Livorno, to place the floating storage and regasification unit outside the port?

The writing is now on the wall for all to see. The Prime Minister has imposed a project timeframe of two years on himself.

With one down and another to go, he is clearly feeling the pressure. But while politicians come and go, the impacts of their decisions remain. I sincerely appeal to the Prime Minister to reconsider his plans in favour of a safer option.

Ryan Callus is a Nationalist Party MP and represents the Opposition on the Mepa board.