It is not just business and industry but consumers, too, that ought to benefit more from the dramatic fall in the price of oil on the international market. The call for the lowering of energy rates was made by the president of the Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry, Anton Borg, at a meeting with the Prime Minister.
He raised a number of other, equally valid points but the matter about the energy rates, which has somehow receded into the background in the wash of the endless number of scandals and governance issues, brings it back to the fore witha vengeance.
The Chamber made the point that, after the 25 per cent cut, industrial tariffs remained above the EU-28 average level and are the fifth highest. These figures, Mr Borg said, needed to be taken within the context of energy rates typically representing about four per cent of turnover in industry or 12 per cent of overhead costs.
The government has been allowed to wriggle out of the issue – rather successfully, given the docile attitude of the Opposition, the consumer and leaders of the main economic sectors – by arguing that it is not passing on the full benefit of the oil price plunge in order to ensure price stability.
But industry and the consumer believe the government is taking the country for a ride. The Chamber feels the term “stability in prices” needs to be redefined, an argument with which there must certainly be widespread agreement in the country. Still, the Prime Minister prefers avoiding the argument altogether.
The government had originally planned to cut energy rates through savings made in the generation of power from a new gas-fired power station. However, since this is not ready yet, the government has only been able to deliver on its promise through a mix of other factors: the windfall from the sharp fall in the price of oil and the installation of the interconnector joining Malta to the European energy grid.
It is about time the government lays its cards on the table and explains the oil dealings made since the fall in the price of oil, the savings made since then and how they have been utilised.
Another valid point raised by Mr Borg is that matters relating to economic and financial policy ought to be kept as distant as possible from political controversy to ensure that no investment or potential investment is affected by political uncertainty.
Though political confrontations, both in and out of Parliament, are the order of the day in Malta,there have been a number of times when two parties worked together on policymaking measures.
But, besides this, there would also need to be meaningful consultation between the government and the business organisations over matters that are of direct interest to them as representatives of business operators, such as, for example, the issue over the future of Air Malta. Even though the national airline has not been unable to operate profitably, it remains a vital cog in the island’s economic success story.
As to the point that appointments to top positions should be made on the basis of meritocracy rather than on political allegiance, experience has shown that there is a huge difference between making promises and honouring them. To its credit, the government has lately – and belatedly – seen to the enactment of legislation regulating the nomination of judicial appointments.
However, still far too many, if not practically all, appointments made so far this legislature carry a political tag.