Not all EU reports were ready when GWU decided anti-membership stand

A Number of reports on the impact of EU membership, commissioned by the General Workers Union, were not completed by the time the union's general conference decided to take an anti-EU stance in February 2001.

The union says its anti-EU decision was based on the conclusions of the reports.

Contacted following a statement he made on Xarabank (TVM) last Friday, the programme's presenter Peppi Azzopardi said he had gone to the GWU headquarters together with James Debono to see the reports after Mr Zarb had made a public statement that the union had nothing to hide and was willing to show the reports to anyone wishing to see them.

"When I went to GWU headquarters, I was given a number of reports and was given about three hours in which to see them.

"I was clearly told by a union official that there were other reports that were not ready. This was a day after the union general conference had taken the decision to oppose EU membership.

"I was and still am shocked and scandalised that the union says it took its decision based on the reports when the reports were not yet ready.

"Apart from the fact that the conclusions of most of the reports I saw were in favour of accession, I cannot understand how the union can say it would not be beneficial for workers if Malta were to join the EU, first because not all the reports had been finalised and secondly because most of the conclusions of the reports that were ready were positive," Mr Azzopardi said.

Mr Azzopardi said that he would be writing to Mr Zarb to again invite the union to publish the reports it had when the decision was taken, and a whole programme would be dedicated to discuss them. "We will not be ready to discuss only the parts the union wants to discuss," he explained.

"I know he cannot publish all the reports as the union does not have them all, but they can publish the ones they had before taking a decison. We are asking the union to publish the reports in full, not to publish excerpts out of context," Mr Azzopardi said.

Several of the GWU reports, published by The Times and The Sunday Times, show that workers and Malta stand to benefit from EU membership.

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 are introduced and implemented as these benefit the workers.

"The union should applaud the fact that workers would be having 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 could be used to develop weak industrial sectors, such as those at Cottonera, and for the retraining of those registering for work.

According to another report, entitled "The Impact of the European Union Regional Policy and Structural Actions on the Maltese Worker", there would be a positive impact for Maltese workers and for the country in general.

This report, drawn up by the GWU's EU desk officer Peter Paul Barbara, 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 drew up its 2007-2013 budget.

The report about the effects of EU membership on the Maltese worker arising out of the EU small- and medium-sized enterprises policy, by Gordon Cordina, said that "with entry into the European Union, Malta will gain access to the financial part of the SME-related legislation. Maltese firms will be able to tap EU financial markets and in particular apply for assistance under regional and social funds."

"The effects of adopting the EU Financial Control regulations on Maltese worker membership" by Robert Suban notes that changes that would have to be made to local legislation are technical and would have little effect on the Maltese worker. "Nevertheless, the impact would be positive as fraud and corruption would diminish".

The report by Mr Cordina noted that with membership, Malta would gain access to EU funds related to SMEs and that Maltese firms will be able to tap EU financial markets and in particular apply for assistance under regional and social funds.

"The Effects of the European Union's Common and Foreign Security Policy on the Maltese worker", also by Peter Paul Barbara, stated that Malta had to be where decisions were being taken (in the EU) if it really wanted peace and stability in the Mediterranean region.

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

Another report the union had about the effects of the 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 ship-repair and electronics, could be actively supported."

The report, 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.

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

The reports were paid for with government funds.