Golly, they’re going to hit the ground running. With a roadshow.
In The Times a few days ago:
(Konrad Mizzi) defended the PL timeframes, saying Labour would hit the ground running with an international call for tenders in April this year followed by a month-long road show in Europe.
And here’s another of Labour’s 60+ glamourpussies, quoted in the same story:
MEP Edward Scicluna defended Labour’s plans, saying consultants had told the PL that there were many overseas companies which would be interested in the sort of investment which the party was proposing and a 10-year price agreement was feasible, given that the investors would have a guaranteed domestic market. As a result Malta would have a cleaner environment and cheaper power. Furthermore the new investment would not pose a burden on the people as this would be a public-private partnership.
They’re not worried because, you know, ‘consultants’ have told them that many people will be queuing up for their lovely project. And they’re going to have a roadshow.
So that’s all right, then.
18 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
So that begs the questions:
1. why consultants said that
and
2. why didn’t Muscat mention them rather than saying companies had contacted the PL directly?
I’m a consultant.
I could piss down their backs and tell them it’s raining.
For a modest fee, of course.
A guaranteed market.
So basically what they’re saying is that for the next quarter century no other provider would be allowed.
Even if the derogation were removed.
Does anyone really believe domestic autonomous rooftop installations will be encouraged?
Yeah right. An antiques roadshow.
No, baxx, a circus/freak roadshow.
With Labour we’re back to queuing.
A liitle detail about the LNG storage tanks.
Konrad Mizzi said that they will have a diameter of 23m. Now just a little research on internet reveals that the diameter of these tanks is in the range of 75m to over 90m. So Konrad was completely wrong about this.
They are even bigger than the Mosta church which is 55m by 75m.
http://www.google.com.mt/#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=26&gs_id=2y&xhr=t&q=LNG+storage+tanks+diameter&pf=p&tbo=d&rlz=1R2ACAW_enMT400&sclient=psy-ab&oq=LNG+storage+tanks+diameter&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1357700187,d.Yms&fp=895f9435db3b688c&biw=1067&bih=495
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotunda_of_Mosta
So what’s a few metres between friends.
If Edward Scicluna were teaching B.Econ at the University of Malta and had to grade a student’s thesis, which cheek would he wipe first with a page reading what he himself stated above, namely
“there were many overseas companies which would be interested in the sort of investment which the party was proposing and a 10-year price agreement was feasible, given that the investors would have a guaranteed domestic market. As a result Malta would have a cleaner environment and cheaper power. Furthermore the new investment would not pose a burden on the people as this would be a public-private partnership.”
It will probably be April 1st.
Give the idiots another couple of weeks and they’ll be saying ‘What power plant?’
Pretty simple solution to this:
A) ask the consultants to place their claim in writing;
B) ask them to state a price range;
C) ask them to confirm they have professional indemnity for around 300m to 500m.
That should be fun.
There was a programme yesterday morning on RAI, about LNG , gasifiers and energy generation.
In Italy many persons are up in arms and concerned about the environmental issues related to gasifiers. Here is a link to the recording.
http://www.rai.tv/dl/RaiTV/programmi/media/ContentItem-527e7235-d37b-4991-af35-4013fe1957a3.html#p=0
I listened again to this, and I draw many parallels to the Malta situation.
Scroll forward to 20:00 and start to listen about the hazards, about shipping security (no shipping activity withing 2.0 – 2.75 kms), about promised reduced bills, about environmental issues related to high chlorine levels, about the risk of having a power station close by…
My, my – two years to have it up and running. My left foot.
“Furthermore the new investment would not pose a burden on the people as this would be a public-private partnership.”
As in the PPP will not recover the costs but leave them there as a gift to the Great Leader and his people.
They still have the “jew b’xejn jew xejn” mentality.
Insomma, as Konrad himself admits in his Anglo-Maltese fashion: “Xej’ mhu new, Minister”. Exactly – typically Labour.
Not a burden on the people? Is this ‘professur’ for real?
PPP ventures bear fruit when the risk factor is low-to-moderate.
Secondly, negotiations as to who shoulders such risks need to be conducted transparently with just and fair outcomes for all parties concerned, including the public consumer.
Now here we’re talking about gas supply to fire a power station of the same type, when we know that LNG, a finite resource, is subject to volatile cost fluctuations.
This is not a PPP for the building of a railway or an aqueduct, for heaven’s sake.
And the PL is already hiding a good number of the costs at the embryonic stage.
I cannot bear to imagine what will happen when they get to dealing with the risk factor. Hello? Quo vadis?