Meanwhile, Daniel Holmes has been languishing in jail for years for just smoking pot on his own. He stole nothing, corrupted nobody, hurt no one. Malta is morally corrupt and this government is sinking in a quagmire of its own making.

Mr. President, free Mr. Holmes now for decency`s sake, before you go.

I did once, Daphne. He had to stand on a stool: (Three legged type.)

Agree 100%. In most civilized societies it’s called fraud. And if it cannot be exactly determined how much the fraudsters “saved” by accepting and presumably paying for a dodgy meter then appoint a judge to make the determination..with no appeal rights.

It’s also called user pays..in civilized societies. No judge needed actually, use the average correct bill as a benchmark and apply it accordingly.

Excellent point made here about the amount of electricity stolen on average per tampered meter, same point also made by G. Schembri below.

In fact, I would say that even the amount paid for the tampered meters would have varied depending on the ultimate amount of annual benefit to the “beneficiary.”

It is possible that some of the “beneficiaries” made savings amounting to twice the average of Eur 30,000 – amounts in excess of Eur 60,000 – while others saved a few thousand Euros at best.

So among those “beneficiaries” there must be some real “sharks” – I’m borrowing a term used by the prime minister and his Minister of Energy.

What other “sharks” is the prime minister looking for?

I hope that none of those “sharks” has been showing public support to the prime minister during or after the electoral campaign.

Maybe you should have done some research and talked wth real lawyers. But then we know the shallowness. Journalism at it’s worse – misinformation at its best.

[Daphne – Ryan, I think you need to sit down with a ‘real lawyer’ and have him or her read this carefully to you while explaining the concepts and what they mean. This is not the way to understand the principles which underpin laws – by Googling random phrases on the internet to bring up promotional articles by law firms.]

Muscat didn’t mention economic development and jobs because he has no plans for any. The man who never faced competition at home – or ever had to buy his own home – has no insight into the anxiety of economic uncertainty or the delayed gratification of working for reward.

Muscat became prime minister not because he thought he could make a good job of it but because he rather facncied himself as a player on the world stage (ahem). Shame he made such a hash of it once he got there. In his own immortal words, the king is naked:

http://www.weforum.org/sessions/summary/future-europe

Muscat meant and understood perfectly well what he said. He believes it is the prerogative of the prime minister to exercise absolute power. The notion of checks and balances is alien to him.

You’re assuming the tampered meters were in households, not in hotels, factories, and other commercial establishments.

The bribe amount alone suggests that, in the main, it wasn’t paid by householders but by those who stood to make rather large savings.

Well yes, true. I was only going through the options. I did not mean to imply that Enemalta would actually do both.

The salient point though is that Enemalta might not be entitled to sue for the bribe money, but there should be a case for the loss of income resulting from the fraud.