Let there be light

The blackouts recorded the other weekend raised the spectre of another summer with electricity outages similar to that of last year despite all Enemalta’s efforts to avoid a repetition.

One is reminded of the Maltese saying that the scalded dog thinks that all water is hot (il-kelb il-mismut kull ilma jaħsbu misħun). After a weekend which included the warmest day on record for the entire planet, it seems we have some respite and the surge of electricity outages seems to have been checked. One can never be sure, of course.

The last time I checked I found that a power outage in Birzebbuga last Thursday was resolved relatively quickly.

Minister Miriam Dalli must be flummoxed. She can only assure compensation to effected consumers. Despite all the efforts to strengthen the electricity grid, it seems Enemalta’s calculations of the increase in electricity demand this year, were way out of reality. Demand inexplicably continues to grow while problems and defects in the grid keep being discovered.

This is the result of Malta’s current economic model that sees a constant increase of foreigners coming to Malta to work as well as a result of the policy of subsidising electricity which is costing the nation much more than consumers are paying for. Tourists and foreigners coming for work in Malta increase the load on all infrastructural services. How on earth is it possible that Labour’s economic planners missed this point?

In this scenario, increasing somewhat the price of the service to encourage a decrease in the demand is a tactic beyond government’s possibilities, despite the monopolistic situation that the provision of electricity enjoys in Malta.

From a public relations point of view, Enemalta is mishandling the problem. Instead of apologising to consumers for the power outages, Enemalta said in a public statement that ‘propaganda’ was making things worse. This is crazy. What Enemalta must have meant is that public reaction to the outages led to the perception that things are worse than they actually are. But Enemalta should know that one cannot tackle public perceptions by calling them propaganda. This only makes the perceptions even worse.

Propaganda in this case must be referring to the anti-government sentiment expressed by the common man because of the power outages. Does Enemalta - and the government itself - believe that the Opposition has no right to capitalise on the situation which is the result of its shortcomings and incompetence?

Enemalta must learn that the customer is always right and the way to tackle perceptions is certainly not to call them propaganda.

Negative comments apparently add to the pressure that Enemalta is facing. It seems that the cook cannot withstand the heat in the kitchen.

Enemalta seems to expect the public not to make negative comments when there are electricity outages, more so when the public recalls the disaster the country faced last year when electricity outages were a record. Enemalta must be thinking Malta is a country governed by some wayward dictatorship that does not brook any negative comments.

From the Auditor General’s report on Enemalta, it results that the company has, for quite a number of years, consistently not managed to invest in the maintenance and strengthening of the electricty grid as much money as was assigned in its own budgets. This is not propaganda. It is bad management. It is the truth for which only Enemalta is responsible.

The tenor of state aid

Dr David Fabri had an interesting piece in The Corporate Times last Sunday. I know it was written by him because I recognised him from the photo accompanying the article. Otherwise his name was nowhere to be seen.

The piece discussed the “growing contempt for transparency and openness” - especially where FIAU is concerned.

The author than delved into the issue of Joseph Calleja - the tenor - who is refusing to publish how much public funds have been given to support his concerts and other activities subsidised by the state.

Calleja’s financial advisors have pleaded that due to his fame, he is not subject to normal rules. His representative was quoted in Shift News as having asserted that disclosing his fees would undermine his reputation and might cause him embarrassment.

The tenor of the rules, it seems should change for tenors!

This is an obvious clash between the Joseph Calleja’s right for privacy and the public’s right to know how our money is being spent. I have no doubt that Calleja’s privacy is less important than the public’s right - even though he does not think so.

Fabri goes on to refute Calleja’s claim that whatever public funds he receives are ‘intrinsically confidential’. He rightly insists that they are exactly the opposite. If one receives public funds, everything should be transparent, above board and open to public information and scrutiny.

Calleja’s claims are incredible and unacceptable in a democracy, and the government should be continually badgered to publish the amounts paid to Joseph Calleja and other artists who are paid/subsidised directly by the state. That is how checks on abuses can be made.

Until this happens, ‘nessun dorma’.

Where autocracy rules

A recent issue of The Economist reviewed a book written by Anne Applebaum with the interesting title: Autocracy, Inc.

To quote from the review: ‘In 1999 Hugo Chàvez made a choice. He had won Venezuela’s presidency promising revolutionary change. His chief of internal police brought him evidence of graft within his regime: some top officials were stealing from a fund for the poor. Chàvez listened, said nothing and sacked the whistle blower. Insiders got the message: if you are loyal you can steal. Chàvez wanted to stay in power for ever.

He bet ‘that corrupt officials would prove more malleable than clean ones, and he was right’ writes Anne Applebaum.

According to her, ‘whatever their professed ideology, today’s strongmen typically crave little besides power itself and the loot it brings. They share an enemy: checks on power and the democratic world that espouses them. That common enemy spurs them to collaborate, spinning global networks of mutual support.’

When American sanctions were slapped against Venezuela, it found help from Russia and Cuba and it allegedly laundered money for Hezbollah, a pro-Iranian militia.

The enemies of democracy are easily identified.