Following yesterday' revelations by the Daphne Project regarding the Electrogas/ Socar contract and the alleged above-market price Malta is paying for the supply of liquid petroleum gas (LNG), the Partit Demokratiku has called for the publishing of the full unredacted contract of the deal and an independent review by foreign experts to advise parliament and the Maltese  people on the legitimacy, and legality of said contract.

The articles published yesterday by The Times of Malta allegedly reveal that Malta is found to purchase €131.6 million worth of LNG from Electrogas ever year, who in turn has entered into a $1 billion deal with Azerbaijan's state-owned company Socar. It was also claimed by the Daphne Project journalists that taxpayers are potentially losing tens of millions of euros from the deal, given that Enemalta and Electrogas will purchase the gas from Socar at a fixed rate of €9.40 per unit up until April 2022; and that the gas Electrogas buys from Socar, is initially purchased at a lower market price with Shell. Government argues  that contrary to the allegations being made, the Maltese consumer today is paying significantly lower energy tariffs than they did under the previous administration

It was also revealed that Nexia BT played a role in the Electrogas selection process, according to revelations by Daphne Project journalists.

The PD asked a number of questions and made a few observations:

1.     Why was a contract signed with Socar to supply LNG when it is not a known supplier or producer of it?

2.     Why was the LNG not bought at a cheaper rate directly from the supplier to Socar, Shell, at a much lower rate, the rate Shell sold the gas to Socar?

3.     If, as has turned out, the price we pay is almost double the current commercial rate, why has there not been a price correction as is normal practice? It can be done; Italy and Lithuania managed. Is there a clause in the contract allowing it?

4.     Why was there never a public call for tenders to supply LNG to Malta?

5.     Why was the contract fixed for, in the words of an international expert, 'an unusually long time?'

6.     Why did the then energy Minister Konrad Mizzi and Prime Minister Joseph Muscat omit to invite journalists and take along public servants when signing an agreement for 'strategic cooperation in the field of energy's with Baku?

7.     We note Konrad Mizzi used 'ministerial discretion' to also sign fuel hedging agreements for petrol and diesel with Socar in 2014, also an unorthodox practice. Is there a pattern in all this?

8.     We note that Nexia BT was involved in the deal, a company closely linked with an inner circle around the Prime Minister, a company the name of which crops up time and again in deals of dubious repute.

9.     We note that Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri have now been definitely linked with 17 Black, a company that received a 200,000 euro from the local agent handling the tanker that supplies gas to the power station.

10.   We note that 17 Black also received 1.4 million euro from an Azerbaijani company.

"Energy is a strategic resource. Without it our country cannot function. Buying it way above commercial rates puts us at a disadvantage. The Maltese consumer is shouldering the burden of that extra cost. If people have been found to profit from signing deals that are disadvantageous to the nation, they should be forced from public office and prosecuted for, at the very least fraud; and if the profiteering is proven to be systematic and widespread, possibly treason."