The Prime Minister's statement that the increase in energy tariffs was introduced in order to ‘safeguard jobs' is the latest in a series of sorry excuses made by the government on the matter to justify its incompetence. Just prior to the last general election Azzjoni Nazzjonali stated that Enemalta was to all intents and purposes bankrupt after years of mismanagement, whereby it was forced to sell energy at a loss for the sake of political convenience. The prime minister had publicly retorted on national TV that this was not the case and he gave his personal guarantee that Enemalta was doing fine. The inevitable result is that instead of paying for gradual and fluctuating market prices over a number of years, most people and businesses have now been imposed with a sudden price hike, at a time when they can afford it least and where the price of oil has been at a record low for a record period of time.

Far from safeguarding jobs, these measures are another nail in the economy's coffin - the price that we all have to pay for two decades of reckless government spending.

Furthermore, Azzjoni Nazzjonali has and will continue to warn that the irrational fixation with publicly subsidising other forms of commercially non-viable forms of energy generation such as wind or solar will inevitably make things worse. This, because, the productive sector will be forced to invest in these means of inefficient production only to buy the resultant energy at a higher price and with the theory that CO2 is the driver of climate change being increasingly debunked - the public will be forced to do so for no apparent gain.

If the government truly wanted to safeguard jobs, it should first of all recognise that it is not the government's role to drive the economy or to impose a particular ideology and secondly it should therefore restrict its public spending and keep bureaucracy to a minimum. In a nutshell it should wherever possible cut taxes and stop interfering in people's lives and leave the productive sector do what it and only it does best - create wealth.

But this is difficult for this government and indeed for the opposition to do. With both of them subscribing to a doctrine that demands that you rob Peter in order to pay Paul, they both now find themselves increasingly dependent on the political support of Paul.

And therein is the crux of the matter because as long as the Government continues to rob Peter in order to pay Paul, we will remain in a vicious circle until one day Peter will decide he's had enough and he will either change his name to Paul or will flee to somewhere where he's respected.

And when Peter will be no longer around who will take care of Paul?