The decisions that matter

Cabinet yesterday heard first hand environmental consultant Rachel Decelis identify the factors that are straining Malta’s energy infrastructure. And her analysis did not stop at climate change and the higher temperatures and extended heatwaves this is causing in summer.

Of course, she did speak about the increasingly harsh summers Malta is experiencing and the massive strain this places on the country’s energy infrastructure. She also stressed that preparations need to be made now before next summer to try and mitigate against rising demand.

But Decelis also put her finger on two important causes that government keeps ignoring—Malta’s indiscriminate energy subsidies are leading to waste and a growing resident and tourist population have put added strain on the country’s infrastructure.

Maybe now, given that the arguments have been made by an apolitical technocrat, who was invited to address Cabinet, ministers will understand their duty to take the decisions that matter.

Robert Abela’s government has for too long adopted a tomorrow-never-comes attitude, splurging subsidies and goodies indiscriminately but at the same time denying that its own economic policy based on imported labour has also contributed to the strain on public infrastructure. This attitude has created a false sense of security that Malta is somehow immune from international realities that have seen the price of oil and gas increase exponentially.

And now, after the finance minister on Sunday sounded an expenditure warning in view of the burgeoning energy subsidy, the chickens are coming home to roost.

This is not a call for austerity. Rather it is a call for level-headedness that avoids populism and speaks honestly to people about the challenges ahead and these should be tackled.

Now, we know that government has no control over climate change but it has been pretty obvious for decades that the situation was bound to get worse.

What did the government do in the interim to encourage judicious use of energy and greater private investment in energy conservation? Very little.

The prime minister and his Cabinet simply find it hard to even encourage people to rationalise electricity use not to be seen as ‘negative’. Instead, they go on to deride a policy initiative undertaken by a Nationalist administration in the now distant past to encourage the replacement of domestic appliances with energy-efficient ones and the replacement of filament bulbs with energy-saving ones.

The government simply cannot get itself to set air condition temperatures in public buildings and offices at a moderate but comfortable level, to reduce demand, lest it would be seen as ‘bad’. Instead, when asked about an expert’s advice to set ACs at 25℃, the prime minister grudgingly agrees but insists people are not to blame for power cuts.

Unfortunately, this attitude will get in the way of preparing the country for the next summer and beyond as the expert invited to Cabinet suggested. It was the failure to plan for economic growth that eventually manifested itself in a crumbling electricity distribution system. And now that millions have been invested, we only hope that the upgrades to the distribution network are also taking into account soaring temperatures.

And then there is government’s decision to dish out indiscriminate subsidies. It is unbelievable that no distinction is made between energy-guzzling households and those with modest consumption. The indiscriminate nature means people can waste electricity, something that has been allowed to become an ingrained mentality.

But even if we were to accept the principle that electricity subsidies should apply equally across the board, should that same principle apply also to fuel? Shouldn’t motorists be asked to shoulder part of the rising costs? And why should boaters even enjoy a fuel subsidy?

The biggest concern with fuel subsidies is that they are preventing significant investment in alternative energy sources. The floating offshore windfarm project in Malta’s exclusive economic zone seems to be progressing in slow motion. A similar project off northern Gozo, once considered to be a viable option has long vanished from public discourse.

After years of adopting a money-no-problem attitude, the burgeoning energy subsidy is now causing government to prioritise its spending. We will not be surprised if the key election plank to introduce a super bonus for every worker will be put on hold. But if it does so, the government must shoulder political responsibility for not being honest with people during the election campaign.

The third cause of strain on the energy network is the problem government refuses to acknowledge—population growth, exacerbated by ever-increasing tourist numbers.

There is no immediate solution to this but some humility in accepting the big difficulties the model of rapid economic growth based on imported labour has caused will not go amiss.

As for tourism, the government can start with a two-year moratorium on the issuance of short-let licences and proper enforcement across the board of rules introduced at the start of summer. This country requires a new direction and policymakers can start showing the way unless they choose the status quo because they do not want to be seen as ‘negative’.