It might help him win the Eurovision Song Contest at last.

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110127/local/minister-explains-his-income

“As a political scientist”

I didn’t know politics was a science.

Why this obsession with other people’s money? There also was a parliamentary question about Tonio Borg’s earnings, when income/assets of ministers are decared and published annually.

I wouldn’t mind you or anyone working in the private sector earning as much money as they can, but when it comes to people who get paid from the money I pay, and when I see the amount of tax I pay I tend to see red.

[Daphne – At least they’re working for their money, Grace. Why don’t you see red when you see your money going to bums?]

Frankly I don’t give a damn if PL was for or against such a rise, I for one am against it since they are comparing their wages to other EU ministers but never compare our wages to other EU workers.

[Daphne – I never wrote anything about it because I thought it was completely uninteresting, and I still do. Everybody else seemed to agree at the time, including the Labour Party, that the subject was not worth discussing. I don’t get cross when other people get a pay rise. I think that it’s none of my business. And I certainly don’t feel cheated when ministers and MPs finally decide that they should be paid more than a glorified accounts clerk. On the other hand, it’s the people who live off benefits, most of whom vote Labour, who make me feel cheated. They don’t do a day’s work and live off the earnings of people who bust their gut.]

Liberal, I generally agree with your statements. The point is that in the controversy over the electricity tariffs, the Partit Laburista criciticed the rate of ROCE used by Enemalta in the computation of the tariffs. Now I presume that the rate used by Enemalta was based on advice of qualified consultants.

The PL are suggesting that by adopting a lower ROCE, Enemalta, and hence the government, can lower the annual electricity bill of Maltese consumers by about Euro 15 million. This is in fact the only reduction in electricity tariffs proposed by the Partit Laburista.

Now besides sounding an arbitrary and unprofessional approach to solving a serious issue, this proposal goes diametrically opposite to S&P’s change in Enemalta’s credit rating.

The government cannot lower the tariffs by lowering the ROCE, since Enemalta’s cost of borrowing is now likely to go up. And the consultants would have, most probably, already allowed for this in the ROCE used by Enemalta.

Joseph Muscat is again promising something against all logic, and S&P has proved him wrong.

When it comes to ROCE, the higher the better. I cannot understand why anyone would want to lower it.

The ROCE must be higher than the interest rate of the borrowings, otherwise the company won’t be in a position to finance its debts.

If I make 15% ROCE from my business, it pays me to stay in business unless there is something better elsewhere. If I make 1% ROCE, I’d better sell my business and invest somewhere else since even term deposits pay more.

There are various ways of working ROCE. Could Labour be telling Enemalta to work it in another way?

The new hospital? CET? Liberalisation of everything? the Euro? Independence in 1964? Local Councils?