The last thing I remember was ex-Minister Michael falzon had to ‘recheck’ some matters to explain, at least, what happened under his watch.

Why am I not surprised that nothing was forthcoming?

It is obvious more than ever, that rather than a change in government (of the alternating absolute PN or PL type) we need a political scenario with more than two opposing bloated parties cancelling each other out, to a multi party parliament and possibly coalition government, where objective decisions are honestly discussed, evaluated and explained (and at time admitting mistakes and identify how they were readdressed not to reoccur) with the nation’s real long term interest, rather than the party’s or worse still a gang within it.

With Labour you can rest assured that there are MANY things you are not being told.

There is a major flaw in your export theory, E Muscat.

How can we export ‘surplus electricity’ when our cost is definitely higher than that produced in Europe?

We can only export via the inter-connector to the European grid. Now we know that energy is generated there by a mix of oil, gas and nuclear power stations.

The average cost of the end product is higher than nuclear but cheaper than oil or gas. We also know that importing gas, by any means (shipped in, piped in) is more expensive due to shipping or piping charges, whereas fuels are available on the spot in Europe, hence lower delivery charges.

And what about the cost of building the necessary infrastructure, be it tanks or pipeline? do they come for free?

So by necessity our unit price per kW will definitely be higher than the average price of the European product and it will have to be an idiotic buyer who will pay more for something he has on his doorstep at a lower cost.

Moreover, was the investment in the inter-connector not for the sole purpose of importing energy at a lower price than we can generate here?

I read it too – the Times.

Who in his right senses would advance money taking on the additional burden of having this kind of liability on the balance sheet for at least a year?

It is not even a debt.

It is a provision against projected future earnings. And my emphasis is on ‘projected’ and ‘future’.

If the business goes belly up, who will make good for that payment to the investors?

It makes no business sense. Unless, there is something that we’re not being told.

To entertain your masochistic fantasy, the ‘opposition’ would simply reply – ‘Ah, but you knew about it before you started’.

I am not a technical person but from what I’ve been hearing these last few days, Sicily has a surplus of electricity generation so they won’t need to buy energy from anyone and, in fact, want to sell.

The government will answer, but don’t you remember how you never lowered the taxes you had promised to lower in your last legislature?

The Opposition will say “but there was a recession, the proportions of which hadn’t been around for many, many years.”

The Government will say “Ah, but the recession is still with us! So nobody can blame us” to the thunder of banging and applause on the parliament benches.

‘LECCA CULI’ all of them – seeing the bottom line without bothering to look deeper at the vague proposal fed to them by Labour.

Has ANYONE even noticed that we’ve been reduced to GUESSING Labour’s electoral programme?

I mean my god, WHERE is our intellectual class?

We’re out of the arena of political opinion and into sheer immorality here. Vote for the unkown. Give us a chance and you’ll see. Go on take a leap in the dark. And they call it European progressive politics?