PN’s policy path is for households and businesses to carry the volatile price burdens

In his  contribution to The Times of Malta, Adrian Delia paints a picture of Malta standing on precarious ground, shielded only by what he describes as a “fragile” €250 million war chest.

His argument suggests that this buffer may prove insufficient in the face of global shocks, and that energy subsidies, currently protecting households and businesses, are little more than a temporary fix.

There is no denying that global energy markets are volatile. Recent geopolitical tensions and supply disruptions have shown how exposed small states can be. However, acknowledging vulnerability is not the same as suggesting inevitability. Delia’s thinking risks blurring that distinction, creating the impression that rising tariffs, removed subsidies, and a return to surcharges are not just possible, but likely.

Energy subsidies are not an accidental or passive mechanism; they are an active policy choice.  To suggest that these protections are inherently unsustainable, without presenting clear evidence or timelines, risks misleading the public into believing that hardship is around the corner when no such decision has been announced.

Moreover, the idea that a financial buffer is a sign of fragility deserves scrutiny. A “war chest” is not meant to eliminate risk entirely, it exists precisely to absorb it. Its presence reflects preparation, not weakness. Malta has already navigated significant global disruptions in recent years without transferring the full burden of rising energy costs onto consumers. That track record should form part of any balanced assessment.

Delia also raises the possibility that, in a future crisis, a PN government, if elected, will pass costs directly onto households and businesses. This is the policy path of a PN government if elected. He has put this in writing now and PN Leader Alex Borg has not stated otherwise.

Governments are not without options: they can adjust taxation, extend subsidies, introduce schemes, invest further in energy diversification, or leverage other support mechanisms.

PM Abela recently met with energy sector representatives on a plan on the above.

Public debate on energy policy should be grounded in realism, but also in proportion. Raising questions about sustainability is both necessary and responsible. However, portraying existing protections as fragile without equal attention to the mechanisms that sustain them risks creating unnecessary concern among families and businesses already navigating economic pressures.

The real issue is not whether Malta faces challenges, it does. The question is whether those challenges are being presented in a way that informs or unsettles. Policy tools such as subsidies and financial buffers are not illusions; they are deliberate safeguards. Their future depends on decisions yet to be made, not on outcomes that are predetermined.

Malta’s energy strategy, like that of any country, must continue to evolve. Government is actively seeking the best possible option. In times of uncertainty, clarity matters. So does balance.