NEWS | Wednesday, 11 March 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Raphael Vassallo
Representatives of Malta’s major trade unions gathered yesterday outside Parliament in Valletta, handing out letters to individuals MPs in a last ditch attempt to pressure the House into withdrawing the latest water and electricity bills during the debate which opened that same evening.
“We appeal to you as a representative of the people in Parliament... to take a position to revise the tariffs downwards – considerably downwards – with retroactive effect,” was the letter’s main message to individual MPs, bearing the seals of 11 unions: the Malta Union of Teachers, UMASA, the General Workers’ Union, MUMN, the Airline Pilots’ Association, AAE, UT&C, UHBC, the Union of Cabin Crew, as well as representatives of professionals in the public service. “This should also be done in view of the fact that the price of oil has dropped considerably, and is now at the same level as the price before the surcharge was introduced.”
The unions also complained about discrimination in the way the eco-reduction thresholds were drawn up. “Bear in mind that the people – especially workers, pensioners and their families – will be closely following the position you adopt in Parliament as a representative of the people.”
Speaking on behalf of the unions, GWU general secretary Tony Zarb expressed disappointment that the expected reduction in utility tariffs, predicted by both the GWU and the Labour Party in recent weeks, failed to materialise before the debate got under way.
Last week, Zarb claimed that “a little bird” told him the government planned to cut the utility rates by 15%. But there was no such announcement before Parliament convened yesterday to debate an Opposition motion on the issue.
Opening the debate, Dr Muscat slammed the government for trying to justify its tariff revisions by presenting its own costings, which he claimed “made no sense.” Echoing the unions’ concerns, the Labour leader criticised the eco-reduction thresholds as being high out of reach for most ordinary citizens; and also accused the government of failing to honour a promise to lower the rates, if oil prices fluctuated by more than 15%.
But the main thrust of Muscat’s speech was to claim that Enemalta’s funding requirements were now 33% less than originally estimated: leaving the government with no further excuse to resist the unions’ demands, and lower the tariffs to the equivalent of 50% the previous surcharge.
For his part Dr Lawrence Gonzi defended his government’s position, arguing that Dr Muscat’s suggestions, in the context of the current economic crisis, would erode Malta’s competitivity and endanger thousands of jobs.
The Prime Minister reminded his counterpart that the country was still committed to meeting its financial targets by 2015. The government was being responsible in doing our utmost to reach these targets; not with populist rhetoric, but by gradually introducing a change in how energy is used in our country.
Dr Gonzi also belied Dr Muscat’s claim that the surcharge was raised immediately after the March 8 election. In March, he explained that the international price of oil stood at $100 barrels. The government maintained the surcharge at its pre-March level despite increases in that price; but by June oil had reached a record high, and experts even predicted it would reach the $200-mark before the year’s end.
Gonzi asked who was more responsible: the Opposition, which suggested slashing the surcharge by half at such a sensitive time? Or his own government, which sat down to discuss the issue and devised a system which would incentivise people to lower their consumption rates?
The debate will continue this evening.

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

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.