The arrogance of Enemalta’s bosses

Enemalta’s reaction to the National Audit Office’s high-level review of the power outages in July 2023 was shameful, to say the least. 

The company, which is majority State-owned, stuck to its line that the multiple power outages were purely the result of the extraordinary eight-day heatwave. 

The NAO did acknowledge the impact the heatwave had. In its review, which took a 10-year time window between 2014 and 2023, the NAO also looked at meteorological data to track the behaviour of average temperatures. There is no question that the prolonged heatwave was the primary reason why 83 joints on the high voltage network failed, causing widespread disruption. 

But the NAO also looked at the level of investment in the high voltage network over the same 10-year period, the demand pattern and economic growth. The exercise showed that despite an increase in demand and substantial economic growth, investment in the high voltage network decreased. It is true that Enemalta invested in the low voltage network – the section of the grid that connects to the final consumer – but this was not complemented by increased expenditure in the high voltage network. 

This lack of investment contributed to the weaknesses in the high voltage grid that were exposed when the extraordinary heatwave hit. The abnormally high temperatures served as the trigger for the failures that occurred but they also found a high voltage network that was not in its best state. 

The logic behind the NAO’s conclusion is supported by the very same actions Enemalta took as soon as the crisis abated. Since the July 2023 events, Enemalta has ripped open kilometres of roads to lay new cables across various localities in a bid to strengthen the high voltage network and increase its resilience. 

The company said it laid and connected 80km of cable and the process is ongoing after government injected millions of euros more into the project. 

It is thus incomprehensible how Enemalta simply wrote off the NAO’s findings as “an opinion”. In its response to the NAO review, which was reproduced in its entirety in the report, the company denied that a lack of investment contributed in any way to the fracas experienced in the summer of 2023, blaming the events purely on the extraordinary heatwave. 

If lack of investment was not an issue, as Enemalta claims, then why did the company spend millions of euros more than originally earmarked to lay new cables over the past year? If lack of investment was not an issue, why did Enemalta rip open our roads in a flurry of works over the past 12 months? 

Enemalta’s own actions since the heatwave debacle support the NAO’s conclusions that lack of investment in the network was a contributing factor. 

Why Enemalta should write off the NAO’s conclusions as “an opinion” when the facts as determined by the company’s own behaviour in the aftermath dictate otherwise is beyond belief. Enemalta’s reply reflects the arrogance of the company’s bosses. 

Rather than trying to minimise the NAO’s findings, Enemalta’s bosses had better explain why investment in the high voltage network over the past decade did not match the higher demands that were being put on it by a growing population and a more affluent society. 

But then again, like ostriches burying their heads in the sand, it would appear everybody else is wrong except them. 

If this is the case they may care to explain why after July 2023 the company went into an extraordinary frenzy to bolster the network; or was this a waste of taxpayer money to placate consumer anger? 

Enemalta’s pathetic reaction simply shows that the apology the company’s top brass made last year during the debacle was nothing more than empty words. We expected much better.