In the third week of the election campaign we are still discussing Labour’s proposals regarding energy.

The proposal has been dissected and pushed this way and that both by experts and also by non-experts. Whether anybody has understood anything is still a mystery given that not all information has been forthcoming. People who expressed doubts have been called Nationalist sympathizers, and, in short, so many questions have been raised and many are still without a proper reply.

At the end, it would seem it all boils down to a question of trust or faith in what PL is proposing.

But the issue just refuses to go away and it is being kept kindled by issues that keep cropping up.

First there was a contribution by a former Enemalta manager, John Pace, who made a series of claims, some of which have been denied. Mr Pace’s contribution related solely to the Enemalta management system before Austin Gatt got round to introduce outsiders on to the board.

His main contention, now challenged, was that Enemalta was about to go for gas in connection with an ENI pipeline that passes near Malta.

This was changed, Mr Pace contended, when Dr Gatt became minister in charge of Enemalta replacing Josef Bonnici. Mr Pace further contended that with Dr Gatt, those in favour of continuing to import oil were privileged.

Right on cue, a report surfaced about allegations that an Enemalta manager has been tracked getting kickbacks from a foreign company involved in oil exports to Malta.

The circle, it would seem, is now closed. It’s all a matter of corruption that has stopped the PN government from changing over to gas earlier. That’s why we are still using heavy fuel oil and, although the link is rather tenuous, also why electricity rates are so high. Bu things are not at all that simple.

Instead, it now turns out that the person alleged to have been receiving kickbacks ended his collaboration with Enemalta in 2004 and was appointed to his Enemalta post in 1997. And everyone knows Labour were in power then.

It’s an over-simplification to make the country believe that policy decisions can be taken solely on the influence of an individual or two who may be corrupt. There are, as should be, checks and balances and minutes and meetings where such matters are discussed and decided.

Let us suspend judgement and consider the broad outline: the fact is that neither in 2003, nor now, is the country prepared to change over to gas for electricity provision. Even now, the country has chosen to push the Interconnector from Sicily as a quicker way to reduce this country’s reliance on the importation of fuel and the use of HFO at the power station.

As for gas, there are multiple issues and obstacles to tackle first. Even the Labour plan acknowledges this and speaks of creating a new infrastructure to cope with a gas base for electricity production.

Maybe, we admit, back in 2003 a decision could have been taken to prepare to switch over to gas. But even then, it would have been a drastic measure to take and the country just did not have the money to do it. (Nor does it now).

Every time there is a power failure, as there was last week, we get all sorts of smart-Alecs poking fun at Enemalta and the still-functioning Marsa power station. These people seem to think matters can be decided and implemented in a few hours. On the contrary, the decision to go for the Interconnector was the right one to take and it is the Interconnector, more than the switch to gas, that will put the provision of electricity on a more sure basis.

The BWSC plant, which is now working, has proved its worth and will soon be seen to help cut reliance on the Marsa power station and to cut the amount of fuel needed.

Having said all this, any taint of corruption must be investigated and those found guilty must be punished. There have been many more claims of corruption in the matter of fuel and many things still seem to remain unchecked. We refer, for instance, to the widespread allegation that Malta is awash in illegal and contraband fuel.

But even assuming that corruption indeed existed/exists, that on its own is no reason to change policy. For the policy to be changed, there have to be policy reasons.