Energy Shadow Minister George Pullicino told Parliament yesterday that the Enemalta Bill was intended to facilitate the partial privatisation and selling of parts of the corporation, so that for the first time ever the government would become a minority shareholder in the energy-generation industry.

He said the House was being asked to approve the birth of a private company so that the government would get the 33 per cent investment from the Chinese and be able to sell the BWSC power station.

The government was selling off the country’s best asset to China, he said, thanks to which Enemalta was spending €1 million less a year and putting the government in a position to lower utility tariffs. He underlined that the Opposition had still not seen any deal and had no way of knowing what was involved. What was in it for the Chinese?

Mr Pullicino dwelt at length on the fortunes of the employees through this transition from a corporation to a public limited company, saying the minister had said he was safeguarding workers’ jobs but was not guaranteeing the same present take-home pay.

He referred to a meeting held last September in which the workers were given four choices. But more significant, he said, was that before the elections these workers were assured Enemalta would not be privatised and their take-home pay would remain the same.

Mr Pullicino also referred to Tuesday’s walkout by the Opposition, saying they were insisting that these documents should be published so that they could carry out the necessary scrutiny. The Prime Minister had said there was no secrecy. So what was the problem? Why was the government reluctant to publish this contract?

The Bill explained little of employee relations and how the transfer would take place. But a notice on July 2, posted on notice boards, said all employees would be transferred to Engineering Resources Ltd and become employees of this company, while work conditions and seniority would be retained. They would then be seconded with other companies.

There were more serious concerns, such as a potential change in shift patterns. This could lead to many of the employees losing their shift allowances, up to €10,000 annually for some.

He urged the minister to assure employees that their take-home pay would remain unaffected.

Mr Pullicino said there was no guarantee that work would not become precarious. Chinese companies didn’t have a good track record when it came to management styles and one would hope that these practices would not be imported to Malta.

The debate continues this morning following a ruling by the Speaker who did not accept Opposition Whip David Agius’s argument that if the House met on a Thursday then it would have to discuss Opposition matters.