Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1481355
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 9 OCTOBER 2022 9 INTERVIEW the board' a whole gas market to choose from… … it hasn't worked very well for the rest of Europe, though, has it? Europe is looking for alterna- tive supplies to Russian gas at the moment, yes. But that only illustrates why we have to diver- sify our energy sector. Our long- term goal should really be to in- crease our sources of renewable supplies: even because we need to reach our European targets by 2050. From this perspective, the windfarm is an absolute necessi- ty. This is why, in my first-ever speech in parliament, around seven months ago, I appealed to government to amend our Na- tional Energy Policy: which, to this day, still rules out wind en- ergy altogether, on the grounds that it is 'unviable'. But we have to look at other possibilities as well: the uptake of solar panels, for instance. We still have some potential has not yet been tapped into. To give an example: using roof-space of in- dustrial parks, for solar panels. As it stands today: to install a panel in a government industrial park, you have to pay rental fees; put down a security guarantee… and most people conclude that it's simply not worth their while. So at least, government could in- centivise that, to make it easier for them. Above all, however, I think we should be adopting a more scien- tific, evidence-based approach: in all areas, really; but to energy in particular… because it is, after all, a science-based sector. I take it this is something you feel the government is NOT do- ing, right now? No; and it makes it difficult for anyone else to take a scientif- ic approach, too. Because most of the information and data, concerning the energy sector, is currently being kept hidden. And the little that is available is not even trustworthy: not even when it is data that is mandated by EU directives. Let me give you one example. According to EU directives, En- emalta should annually publish the fuel-mix composition of the energy distributed over the previous year: i.e., how much of it came from LNG; how much from renewables, etc. Until last week, however, the only data available was for 2019. So I asked a parliamentary question about the fuel-mix composition for 2020 and 2021. First of all, [Minister Miriam Dalli] said that the values are on- ly published in the last quarter of the year: which means that it takes them 10 whole months to calculate them. She also told me that the 2020 values had already been published online: making it seem as though I hadn't noticed them. But actually, they were uploaded last week… To cut a long story short, how- ever: when I looked at the fig- ures for 2020, I saw that they also contained the comparative data for 2019 – which had been in the public domain for two years – but… the values for 2019 were different, in the two ver- sions. Two years ago, they told us that 56% of energy imported through the interconnector, in 2019, had come from LNG. Last week, however they told us that the percentage for 2019 was ac- tually 72%... Bear in mind that these figures are what the 'CO2 emissions fac- tor' is based on, that is included in your electricity bill: i.e., how much carbon dioxide is gener- ated, by each electrical unit that we consume. Now: the CO2 factor that is on your bills today, was calcu- lated on the basis of the '56%' of three years ago. But that val- ue has now gone up, from 380 to 404. So… what's happening? How can we have an energy pol- icy that is driven by science, and evidence-based research… when you can't even trust the official data, provided by Enemalta? On a separate note: I can't help but observe that – while you yourself consistently talk about a 'scientific, evidenced-ap- proach in all areas' – the same cannot really be said for the Nationalist Party as a whole. Leaving aside that certain statements made by Bernard Grech recently – such as his call for the dead foetus to be legal- ly represented, in the Andrea Prudente case – were not just 'unscientific', but absurd… it remains a fact that the PN still struggles to be taken seriously as a viable Opposition (to the extent that even now – after it has been 'proven right', on so many issues – it couldn't mus- ter more than a few thousand of its Old Guard, for a public pro- test). How do you account for that, yourself? I think the biggest stumbling block we need to overcome, at this stage, is that the negative results we have obtained in the past, have reinforced the public perception that 'we don't stand a chance of ever being in gov- ernment'. So people out there might not be interested in what we have to say, because they rea- son to themselves that: 'Whatev- er they say, they're still going to remain in Opposition'. That is the perception we have to beat. And the moment we do that – the moment we show that we CAN, in fact, be a par- ty in government government – I think people will be more at- tuned to what we are saying; and many of them will realise that what we've been saying all along was, in fact, true. Even in corruption, for in- stance. We've been talking about corruption for so long, that peo- ple have become immune to it; and government has also man- aged to instil this idea that 'both parties are equally corrupt' – which only desensitizes people even further to this topic... But by your reasoning, the question becomes: 'How does the PN intend to overcome this perception, that it is destined to remain in opposition forever?' Surely, the answer cannot be by 'retaining the same leader, who has already been roundly defeated in an election any- way'. Wouldn't you say, then, that the PN itself also needs to transform, in order to change those public perceptions? First of all, the party is not just made up of its leader. So the de- feat at the last election cannot be solely attributed to Bernard Grech… as though 'changing the leader' were some kind of 'mag- ical solution' to all the party's problems. But I think that certain steps were taken, since the last elec- tion. Over the summer, we re-organised most of our struc- tures, to be more ready to mo- bilise where necessary. And we started off with a series of ac- tions: the class-action on elec- tricity bills; a judicial protest against the oncology contract awarded to Technoline; and just today, we asked for another in- vestigation into the Marsa fly- over scandal… So as a party, I think we have begun to send out a clear mes- sage that the Opposition is there; and is doing its work. We still have our shortcomings, nat- urally; but I think we've learnt a lot from them; and we've cer- tainly been punished a lot for them, too. But we never had 'the most corrupt Prime Minister in his- tory', either; and we certainly cannot be blamed, because a criminal gang took over in 2013, and simply pillaged everything in sight... PHOTO: JAMES BIANCHI / MALTATODAY