Why do the people behind Gasco seem to have the divine right of conducting their business on the land of others? We have seen it happen in the case of Multigas where the land on which they operate was given to them by the government, and now history is repeating itself when Parliament this week discussed the vote of giving another piece of public land to another company, this time Gasco, where the people behind it are practically the same as those in Multigas. It is so unfair that certain people in this country are considered above others. First of all, the gift that the government wants to give to Gasco is land pertaining to third parties and not public land. We all know that when such a system was practised by the Labour Government for social government, it was accused of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Now the government wants to expropriate private land to give it to a commercial company such as Gasco, which has no social element at all in its business.
Secondly, the granting of land by the government to the winner of the tender was not a tender requirement; and it is not fair for the other tenderers who submitted their quotations to have included the costs involved in the utilisation of private land. Thirdly, it is not fair for the public to have part of its private land expropriated not for a public purpose as stipulated by law, but for Gasco to be able to operate.
I am sorry but if Gasco did not do its calculations well when it submitted its tender, we should not be the ones to make up for it. Gasco will be replacing Enemalta in the distribution of gas and gas products, and as one Member of Parliament said, I believe Carmelo Abela, the role of the government is not to substitute one monopoly with another, or rather to substitute the public monopoly with the private one.
I do not understand how the government rushes into granting public land to a company but drags its feet into doing the same for others. If Gasco is there to do business and not to provide a social service, why is it being dealt with as if it were a public corporation? As far as I know, any private company that wants to do business in Malta and needs help, has to go through the channels of the Malta Enterprise and apply for assistance from there. Why Gasco is special and why all this generosity, I just cannot fathom.
This will be the second time that the government will be giving a ‘gift’ to the people behind Gasco: the first time was to Multigas and now for the second time, it is Gasco’s turn. The first time land was given next to ST Microelectronics and now in Benghajsa. And what for? What did the public gain out of Multigas when this is purely a commercial company operating for profits with no public element in it at all.
Now for the second time, the government is asking Parliament to allow it to give another piece of land to Gasco, and this for no apparent public purpose at all. There is no public utility in the business: it is purely business and nothing more. I am not sure but I consider this as a form of subsidy from the government to make up for the possible rise in the price of gas cylinders once the service starts to be operated by this company.
Yet again, if there are economic repercussions for the consumer once the gas sector is liberalised, why were these not taken into account when the evaluation board studied the tenders? And can the evaluation board tell us if the granting of public land was a pre-condition of the tender?
People ask questions and the people at Armier and Bahar ic-Cachaq ask even more. The man in the street knows that he does not stand a chance of having any party in government asking Parliament to grant him a piece of public land so that he can go and enjoy picnics with his family. The man in the street knows that he is not Gasco and what does he do? He takes the law into his own hands and creates recreational centres on public property.
Of course this is illegal and cannot be supported but on the other hand, why are some people treated better than others? Why is there no transparency in the way the government makes such decisions? What is the criteria for being eligible for the same treatment as Gasco? Surely the public has a right to ask these questions as it has a right to question why the Government needs to expropriate private property to accommodate not a social necessity but to accommodate a purely commercial company by enabling it to operate its business from land that thanks to a parliamentary resolution, is being robbed from Peter and given to Paul.
As far as I am aware, public land is public and the disposal of such land can only be given when there is a public purpose involved and not for purely commercial or diplomatic matters. Neither can I understand how and when the role of the Commissioner of Lands starts or stops. Disposal of government property, which is our property after all, needs to be done with vigilance and it is not fair for any government of the day to dispose of any of the property entrusted to it for no apparent justification at law.
Let’s face it: these people can afford to buy land on which to operate Gasco and I see no reason why they had to plead with the government to give them a piece of land so that their business can become viable. The Opposition voted against and rightly so, because business is business and no expropriation can justify speculation.
The law is clear and expropriation is only justified when such land or property is needed for a public purpose. How by any stretch of the imagination can the government justify its decision to fit into this definition I do not know.
But one thing I do know is that by doing this the government has created a very dangerous precedent.
And my friend the Parliamentary Secretary Dr Jason Azzopardi will have to work hard to convince the people at Armier and at Bahar ic-Caghaq why the government is not giving them the same treatment as it gave to Gasco!
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Download front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
Gone with the wind Addressing the Nationalist Party general council on Sunday, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi claimed that his government had “never retracted any proposal in the face of national challenges.” Editorial >
Artists, art critics and friends unanimously gather to remember the impact and value of Ebba von Fersen Balzan’s work and her strong connection with the Maltese islands
It is so unfair that certain people in this country are considered above others. First of all, the gift that the government wants to give to Gasco is land pertaining to third parties and not public land. We all know that when such a system was practised by the Labour Government for social government, it was accused of robbing Peter to pay Paul. Now the government wants to expropriate private land to give it to a commercial company such as Gasco, which has no social element at all in its business.
