I followed the example of a facebook comment uploaded on another blog to work out the savings my household will make with Labour's energy proposals.
Our bill for of €717.80 for 7 months is divided into:
An electricity service charge of €36.86
Electricity consumption of €404.83
A water service charge of €33.46
Water consumption of €242.65
Through the new tariff scheme, reducing the electricity consumption bill by 25% and the water consumption bill by 5%, our bill will read:
An electricity service charge of €36.86
Electricity consumption of €303.62
A water service charge of €33.46
Water consumption of €230.52
I know many of us tend to immaturely vote according on what goes in or out our pockets rather than looking at the bigger picture. But for €16 a month, is it really worth the risk?
Our bill for of €717.80 for 7 months is divided into:
An electricity service charge of €36.86
Electricity consumption of €404.83
A water service charge of €33.46
Water consumption of €242.65
Through the new tariff scheme, reducing the electricity consumption bill by 25% and the water consumption bill by 5%, our bill will read:
An electricity service charge of €36.86
Electricity consumption of €303.62
A water service charge of €33.46
Water consumption of €230.52
A total of €604.46 for the same 7 months. A reduction of €16.20 a month.
But this reduction comes at what price?
This grand plan, the one we have been expecting for all these years, will materialize if we find a private investor ready to fork out €500 million in capital investment, if we reach a 10-year fixed price agreement, if we manage to build two high storage tanks for storing LNG, if we find the necessary shipping vessels available to transport LNG, and consists of choosing the private investor who will build a power-station on our land based on an expression of interest and without a proper tendering process and without the need of an Environmental Impact Assessment.
But the crux of the plan is not that. The real issue is that even if all goes as planned, as soon as these 10 years of fixed-price electricity supply are over, our country will be at the mercy of a private investor controlling a monopoly of 40% of our energy supply, who will need to recoup the capital invested plus profits plus any losses he made in the first 10 years plus the extra hike in the price of gas compared to today, and from whom we will be tied to buy our electricity requirements without any grounds for a good negotiating position.
Not only that, but this private investor will also own the LNG terminal through which even Enemalta will have to purchase the gas needed for the generating plant it will retain.
This grand plan, the one we have been expecting for all these years, will materialize if we find a private investor ready to fork out €500 million in capital investment, if we reach a 10-year fixed price agreement, if we manage to build two high storage tanks for storing LNG, if we find the necessary shipping vessels available to transport LNG, and consists of choosing the private investor who will build a power-station on our land based on an expression of interest and without a proper tendering process and without the need of an Environmental Impact Assessment.
But the crux of the plan is not that. The real issue is that even if all goes as planned, as soon as these 10 years of fixed-price electricity supply are over, our country will be at the mercy of a private investor controlling a monopoly of 40% of our energy supply, who will need to recoup the capital invested plus profits plus any losses he made in the first 10 years plus the extra hike in the price of gas compared to today, and from whom we will be tied to buy our electricity requirements without any grounds for a good negotiating position.
Not only that, but this private investor will also own the LNG terminal through which even Enemalta will have to purchase the gas needed for the generating plant it will retain.
And politically, as much as I am in favour of privatisation, I think it should only apply in the context of a free market and not to monopolies, especially in such an essential commodity like energy. And such a plan which will determine the energy policy of not only the next 5, but the next 25 years, should never have been discussed in the heat of an electoral campaign.
Unless this is being done for one sole reason: that if it wins the next election, Labour wants to use the excuse of having an 'electoral mandate' to forge ahead with this plan without any serious discussion on the pros and cons of other alternatives. Just as it did with VAT back in 1996. The end justifying the means.
Unless this is being done for one sole reason: that if it wins the next election, Labour wants to use the excuse of having an 'electoral mandate' to forge ahead with this plan without any serious discussion on the pros and cons of other alternatives. Just as it did with VAT back in 1996. The end justifying the means.
I know many of us tend to immaturely vote according on what goes in or out our pockets rather than looking at the bigger picture. But for €16 a month, is it really worth the risk?
L-ahhar kont taghna (ta' xaharejn) gie €120.79. Maqsum jigi:
ReplyDelete€108.44 konsum tad-dawl
€10.86 kera
€16.17 konsum ilma
€9.86 kera
Wara t-tnaqqis propost mill-PL kieku jigi:
€81.33 dawl (ffrankar ta' €27.11)
€15.36 ilma (ffrankar ta' € 0.81)
il-kera jibqa l-istess.
Jigifieri wara x-xenati kollha tal-PL u d-dahk sfurzat ta Konrad Mizzi nkunu ffrankajna total ta €27.92, jew €13.96 fix-xahar.
U dan irridu nzommu f'mohhna li:
Irid izomm kelmtu li ma jzidx taxxi minn bnadi ohra.
Irid ikun fattibli.
Irid jiswa kemm qal il-PL
Irid isir kollox f'sentejn.
Irid ikun sigur ghan-nies.
Nahseb li nsemmu lil Alice in Wonderland ghall-progett tal-PL hu insult ghal Lewis Carroll.
Insejt nikteb li kellna eco-reduction ta' €24.54.
ReplyDeleteJekk din tigi mnehhija, lanqas €5 ffrankar ma jibqa'!!
Hemm miktub fil-presentation tal-proposta tal-labour li l-eco-reduction ser tibqa' hemm. Informa ruħek.
DeleteSpot on Mark.
ReplyDeleteIn my previous economy-related studies I have had discussions regarding privatisation, so I get what you'r saying well enough. Energy is one of the absolutely vital industries which the public interest demands be kept outside exclusive private control for the sake of availability to the public. This is especially the case in a country like Malta which lacks the resources to diversify its energy sources fully. Moreover, a fully free market is not viable in this sector as Malta due to the size of the country basically requiring only one provider. So, basically, if Muscat's proposals come to fruition, we're in a lot of trouble.
Nies, qed tinsew il-flus li se tiffranka l-Enemalta ... bir-rispett kollu, biex tkunu KREDIBBLI trid tgħid kollox.
ReplyDeleteFl-ewwel 10 snin forsi...imma wara trid tixtri l-gas mit-terminal tal-privat. Int taf xi prezz ha jzommilha?
DeleteProbabli lanqas qabel jiehdu l-kuntratt mhu ha nkunu nafu ghax Expression of interest ha jkun hemm mhux tender.
Ma nafx ghalfejn qed tassumu li KULLHADD se jkun eligibbli ghal 25% ta' skont. Il-kliem "on average" jibqghu importanti hafna f'din il-proposta u jfakkruni fis-sales f'xi hwienet li ikollhom riklam ta' "UP TO 50% discount"... ikollok minn kollox u xi zewg oggetti biss li huma verament 50%....
ReplyDeleteU din, l-Europa taccettaha? Kuntratt daqstant kbir, possibbli li m'hemmx ghalfejn tender? Il-bicca tinten minn rasha. X'hinu l-prezz vera li sa jithallas? U hawn m'hinix nitkellem fuq ir-rati tad-dawl imma fuq affarijiet iktar serji.
ReplyDeleteXejn ma toghgobni li l-Labour qishom sabu tezor bla limitu f'daqqa wahda. Bilfors tahseb hazin. J'Alla z-zejt (mhux tal-power station) jitla' fuq wicc l-ilma, qabel ma jkun tard wisq.
Tinsewx li dawn in-nies ma ddejjqu xejn jaghmlu trattat sigriet man-North Korea. F'liema basla ohra sa jdahhluna tghid?
"...And politically, as much as I am in favour of privatisation, I think it should only apply in the context of a free market and not to monopolies, especially in such an essential commodity like energy" - Agreed.
ReplyDelete