Opposition leader Simon Busuttil said this evening that the Enemalta-Shanghai Electric deal showed how the government was not delivering on its promises but was instead doing what it promised not to do.
Dr Busuttil said in Parliament that it was shameful that this debate on Enemalta was being held in the dark, in that the government, despite promising transparency, had failed to publish the contracts it had signed and related documents on the Enemalta-Shanghai Electric deal.
The government had sold a third of Enemalta and a power station, but it only published a vague 15-page document which did not constitute the real agreement. What did the government have to hide?
It was still not known who would sell electricity and to whom. Had the electricity procurement agreement been signed?
The agreement said Shanghai Electric would convert the BWSC to gas, without giving deadlines. If there was a dispute, would it be Maltese or Chinese laws which would apply?
The prime minister had staked his political future on building a new power station in two years. But March was round the corner and there was no sign of the power station. Would the prime minister resign as he had promised to do?
Dr Muscat had repeatedly said the project was 'on track' when he knew he was 'lying'.
Dr Busuttil said the government was doing the opposite of what it had promised. Instead of building a new power station, it was selling the BWSC power station to another country, something it never said it would do. Significantly it was selling the BWSC plant, which, despite criticism, had been saving Malta €50m a year. Did it make sense to sell a new, efficient power station and they buy electricity from it?
On January 7, two years ago Dr Muscat had actually said that the BWSC plant would remain in Enemalta's hands. The Labour electoral programme also said that Enemalta would not be privatised. Here again, the opposite was happening.
Dr Busuttil said the Opposition was concerned for Enemalta's workers. They were promised that their jobs were assured and their take home pay would not be reduced. Now they were bewildered how they had actually been deceived. One engineer had told him he risked receiving €8,000 less per annum.
And where was the GWU in all this? Was the union serving the interests of the workers or of the government? What was it pocketing to keep its mouth shut?
Dr Busuttil said the Opposition regretted that Enemalta had been shorn of its capacity to generate electricity. The deal with Shanghai Electric meant that Malta was dependant on another country and on a private company for its energy supplies.
The Opposition would continue to insist that Malta should be free to buy its electricity from wherever best suited it, at the best price.
FUEL PRICES
Turning to fuel prices, Dr Busuttil said oil prices had dropped by more than 50 per cent but in Malta, consumers, in contrast to motorists in other European countries, were paying practically the same prices as before. This showed the government's failure.
The people were not interested in how much they paid five years ago, but how much they were paying now. The government was robbing the people every time they went to the pump.
The Opposition would continue to insist that prices had to go down. Dr Muscat could continue to shout as much as he liked about what was done in the past, but the people expected change because oil prices had gone down. The government should not continue to deceive the people. It was unacceptable that prices in Malta were the highest in the EU, Dr Busuttil said.
The people in Malta had ended up paying more in fuel than the savings they were supposed to have made on electricity, he concluded.
DESPITE MUSCAT CLAIMS, FORMER GOVERNMENT HAD PUBLISHED BWSC, ARRIVA AGREEMENTS - AZZOPARDI
Jason Azzopardi (PN) said this was a false debate in that no information was being given on the details of the agreement, including the share transfer agreement, the warranties, and a wealth of other important details.
Just two days ago, the prime minister told journalists that more details had been published by this government than ever before. He claimed the agreements with BWSC and Arriva, among others, were not published by the former government.
This, Dr Azzopardi said, was 'a lie' which was unbecoming of a prime minister.
The 128-contract with Arriva was tabled on October 3, 2011.
And the former government, in May 2010, had also published the contract with BWSC, consisting of 11 volumes and excluding only a small piece which was commercially sensitive.
In contrast, the present government published a document of just 15 pages about the Shanghai deal, which was said to be the biggest foreign investment in Malta.
If the prime minister could lie so easily on something which could be easily verified, how could he be trusted and believed on other matters?
Marthese Portelli (PN) said the document presented by the government spoke of 'Delimara III' but there was no definition, raising questions of interpretation.
The document also said nothing on shareholders and voting rights with the related details. So much for good governance.
There was nothing on where the money from the share transfer had gone. Had it gone to the government or Enemalta?
Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi had said the agreement was a strategic investment in Europe for Shanghai Electric. But what about Malta?
Why hadn't the government published the full agreement?
Mario de Marco, deputy leader of the opposition, said the government, in criticising the PN administration about Enemalta, should also say that it had inherited a new and efficient BWSC power plant which was saving the country €50m per year and which could be converted to gas, and the interconnector which offered an alternative source of power. The former government, therefore, had made adequate provision for Malta's energy demands, a far cry from the situation it found in 1987, if one wanted to discuss the past.
Dr de Marco also hit out at the government for having failed to publish the agreement with Shanghai Electric. Had Shanghai Electric actually acquired 33% of Enemalta? The government had said the money had been transferred, yet MFSA documents he downloaded this afternoon still showed the Maltese government as the only shareholder.
Similarly, had Shanghai Electric actually taken over D3 (the BWSC plant). Again, there was nothing registered with the MFSA. Where was the subscription agreement?
Had the joint ventures International Renewable Energy Ltd and the International Energy Services Ltd been set up? There was nothing in the MFSA registry.
Dr de Marco moved an amendment to a government motion, replacing it with a new text pointing out that the government had not kept its promise to build a power station in two years while breaking its promise not to privatise Enemalta. The amendments criticise the government for not publishing the Shanghai Electric deal and criticise aspects of its announced details, particularly the transfer of all generation facilities.
The amendment was later defeated. The government motion was approved with 33 in favour and 28 against.
Replying later, Energy Minister Konrad Mizzi said the effective date of the agreement was December 30 and the relevant documents had been submitted to the MFSA. (See separate report)