A parliamentary debate meant to shed more light on what is fast becoming an intractable energy project has spawned far more questions than those raised following the government’s admission that the planned building of a new gas-fired power station will not be ready by the target date which it had set itself.
Not only that but, with its back to the wall, the government sought to deflect national attention from the power station muddle by bringing up a case over alleged wrongdoing in a solar energy contract awarded just before the last general election.
These allegations are not to be taken lightly, but what is happening – or not happening – over the government’s energy plans must remain the focal point. The government is wrong if it believes that the country will ignore the vital issues involved in the delay of the project.
Joseph Muscat staked his political career on the target date set for the completion of the gas-fired power station; there is television footage to prove it. He had pledged to step down if the power station is not completed on time, an undertaking meant to show that his party meant business. In fact, Labour’s energy ‘solution’, supposedly tailor-made to reduce the cost of power generation per unit, was the central plank of its election campaign.
Whatever reason Dr Muscat comes up with now to justify his predictable stance not to step down, the pledge he had made will come back to haunt him repeatedly. How are we supposed to believe a single promise made by the Prime Minister again?
Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi is in hot water too, even though he gives the impression that he has ready answers to all the questions being asked. He has skilfully evaded, or superficially treated, a number of important issues that needed to be cleared up in the interest of transparency and accountability to which his party pays so much lip service.
The government seems to think that everything will be fine as long as it honours its pledge to reduce the energy tariffs. However, the feeling is that the government is not telling the whole story. No contracts have been published so far and the people are now in greater darkness over the project than was the case before the parliamentary debate.
According to the original plan, the cuts in the tariffs were only to be made possible through a new energy production mix that would include the building of a new power station, the conversion of the BWSC to gas and the laying of an interconnector.
The energy minister has now said that the €30 million that Electrogas was supposed to pay upfront is now going to be paid over a 12-month period. However, the minister has so far not explained why the consortium is staggering the payment of the amount which, he said, will be used to finance the tariff reduction already granted to households.
How is the tariff cut for industry in March next year going to be financed? The energy minister said this would be made possible through a seven-year business plan that factored in the reduction in energy prices. This leaves people none the wiser because no details have been forthcoming.
This question will no doubt be continued to be asked not just by many in Malta but also by the European Commission, credit rating agencies and international financial institutions.