More favourable GWU reports on impact of EU membership

If Malta really wanted peace and stability in the Mediterranean, as the Malta Labour Party insists, Malta must be where decisions are being taken, a report for the General Workers Union says.

There are no limits to what Malta could do when chairing the presidency of the EU, where it could act as a catalyst to EU-Mediterranean related initiatives, it said.

The report, entitled "The Effects of the European Union's Common and Foreign Security Policy on the Maltese worker", written by the union's EU desk officer, Peter Paul Barbara, was one in a series of about 20 other reports commissioned last year by the union so that it could take a position on EU membership.

None of the reports were published by the GWU. Their conclusions were generally positive but were ignored in the union's final report about EU membership, which had concluded that EU membership was not beneficial for Maltese workers and promised it would keep members updated, although the union did not anticipate reviewing its position.

Neither deputy general secretary Michael Parnis, who is in charge of international affairs, nor Mr Barbara were involved in the union's final report, which was against EU membership.

Details of some of these reports were published exclusively in The Times and The Sunday Times over the past months.

The report says that the EU does not oblige member states to participate in military action. It also criticises the inertia shown by successive governments and lambasts them for failing to take initiatives in international conflict mediation in the Mediterranean region

"Under two successive governments, between 1996 and 1999, Malta could have taken a role in both Balkan crises as well as the Middle East peace process, but both governments, although professing neutrality and belief in a peaceful Mediterranean region, decided to remain passive", the report says.

"Much worse, the opportunity for Malta to contribute to peacekeeping missions through NATO's Partnership for Peace (PFP) was wasted by the Labour government of 1996-98 through its refusal to participate in such a process by withdrawing from PFP. Even though the MLP on a number of occasions said it wanted to be involved in UN-led peacekeeping missions, it failed to contribute to such missions when in government," the report says.

The report goes on to say that the MLP is professing support for the current Maltese neutral status for purely political motivations.

"It is professing Dom Mintoff's idea of Maltese neutrality, but short of the other arguments made in this same idea that included the obligations such a status imposed on Malta, that it should work hard to achieve a peaceful Mediterranean region.

Neutrality is not a peace-building instrument, but only a means by which a country tries to isolate itself from crises, by putting behind it its responsibility towards peace-building and towards solidarity and fellow human beings. As Mintoff said, once peace has been achieved, neutrality does not serve its purpose any more," the report says.

"As East-West rivalry is gone and the envisaged Euro-Mediterranean partnership will soon be in place, the question and status of neutrality and non-alignment should raise serious questions about where Malta is heading, questions that Maltese politicians of both sides should duly note."

The report notes that the main political parties had agreed on various constitutional changes such as those regarding the electoral system, the number of national holidays "as well as to give themselves pay rises", and that "this time they should also come together to forge a respectable and responsible common foreign policy that would earn the respect of our international partners."

The report adds that if Malta stayed outside the EU it would probably be unable to renegotiate its defence agreement with Italy as there are doubts whether EU member states would be allowed to reach agreements with third countries.

"Thus the question of Maltese neutrality would be more questionable than it already is," it says.

"If a conflict arises in Europe or the Mediterranean, Malta would be involved in it one way or another whether or not Malta is in the EU.

"If Malta joins the EU, it would be able to take part in the decision-making process regarding such a conflict, act as a mediator and peace broker between the EU and a third country and benefit from a strong defence structure".

The report concludes that the EU's Common and Foreign Security Policy does not have any impact on union members and does not alter in any way workers' conditions.

The other reports seen by The Sunday Times and The Times also deemed EU membership as positive. A report about the effects of EU's industrial policy on the Maltese worker stated that "Malta must seek to take advantage of any available EU schemes and funds" and that "important industries, like shiprepair and electronics, could be actively supported."

The report, written by Gordon Cordina, also stated that "adopting the EU's industrial policy, that is, opening up markets to internal and external competition, will inevitably lead to a widespread restructuring of Malta's industrial sector. This process would have been inevitable even in the absence of EU accession because of globalisation.

"Malta has lost steam in the 1980s and foreign direct investment is drying up. If this de-industrialisation process is to be stopped, government must introduce most of the policies that are the basis of the EU's industrial policies," the report says.

Another report about the EU impact on small and medium-sized enterprises says that "with entry into the European Union, Malta will gain access to the financial part of SME-related legislation. Maltese firms will be able to tap EU financial markets and in particular apply for assistance under regional and social funds."

Yet another report about the impact of EU membership on the Maltese worker arising out of the EU's research and technology development policy, states that in the short term, such a policy would have little impact on the Maltese economy as a whole and on the Maltese worker in particular, while in the long term, some beneficial effects could be envisaged to spill over to Malta.

A lengthy report on the impact of the EU's social policy and employment, prepared by Dr Godfrey Baldacchino, stated that "A union, such as the GWU, should ensure that all the social policy measures of the EU should be introduced and implemented as these are of benefit to workers.

"The union should show its approval of the fact that workers would have a right to be informed and consulted about measures and decisions which would affect them. Part time workers would no longer be discriminated against," the report says.

The report also says that the European Social Fund can be used to develop weak industrial sectors, such as those at Cottonera, and for the retraining of those registering for work.

Another report, about the impact of EU policies on education, training and youth, states that "the union should welcome the opportunity that Maltese youths would obtain from experiences and training in other EU countries."

Another report, entitled 'The Impact of the European Union Regional Policy and Structural Actions on the Maltese Worker" spelt out that there would be a positive one for Maltese workers and for the country in general.

This report, drawn up by Mr Barbara, last year also stated that the "worst case scenario" for Malta, where EU funds are concerned, would be for the country to freeze its application before the union draws up its 2007-2013 budget.