Talking facts

Last week Professor Ali Bayar, president of Global Economic Modelling Network (EcoMed), Professor of Economics at Brussels University as well as head of the European Economy Unit in the Applied Economics Department at the same university, had some interesting facts to offer the Chamber of Commerce and the Maltese public.

As far as I can recollect, no one has claimed that Professor Bayar has come to Malta to sell one product rather than another, or that he has some hidden agenda. He has come here to talk facts. We are less than three weeks away from the referendum on Malta's EU membership. Talking facts should be each and every person's only agenda. The seriousness of the decision we are about to take in the national interest warrants no less.

Before coming over to Malta last week to give us a detailed analysis, Professor Bayar had conducted a research project over the last 18 months during which he met all the major institutions and their representatives.

As he emphasised, "Malta's EU membership is a major institutional change that the business community and policy makers consider with great care. It raises many important questions regarding the place of Malta in the world economy, the potential benefits and costs of membership or non-membership, the macro-economic and sectoral impacts in both scenarios."

What applies to the business community and policymakers should apply to us all. It is our decision and that is why facts need to be considered as sacred. Unfortunately, there are others who persist with lies, whole lies, and nothing but lies. If mentioning companies which allegedly would be facing difficulties when Malta joins the EU - although those responsible for these companies have issued categorical denials and pointed out that the opposite is true, namely, that they stand to gain through EU membership - were not enough, now the Opposition Leader has gone as far as naming a company that had closed down, and not as a result of our eventual EU membership.

It strikes me as a clever stratagem since a dead company cannot respond. Even more clever then trying to declare as dead voters who are alive and kicking since in that case the persons in question responded immediately.

While lies do scare some people some of the time, especially those who do not mind being scared, such a generous abundance of lies harms the Party that perpetrates that kind of machine, and reduces to a record low its credibility. It is the worst form of overkill that I can recall. One variation of it has been talk of missiles flying over Malta during a walk around the Valletta bastions!

Another still more interesting variation, smacking - to put it mildly - of a mix between racism and xenophobia, suggests that it is only people of a darker skin who favour entry into the EU.

The latest survey carried out by Xarabank points out to 52% intending to vote Yes compared to 19% who are against. Moreover, if one were to eliminate the 'undecided' and those who would not vote or invalidate the vote, the results would be 72.9% in favour of Malta's accession and 27.1% against.

The most important poll, of course, remains that to of March 8, when the people exercise their right to decide our country's future through their vote in the referendum. The survey however does make it clear that the scare campaign is doing more damage to its perpetrators than to our cause to be part of the EU. The people are making first and foremost a choice in favour of facts. They are preferring facts to illusions, truth to lies, objective analysis to deception.

The study conducted by Professor Bayar uses powerful state-of-the-art modelling techniques to quantify the macroeconomic and sectoral impacts of the membership and the non-membership scenarios. The study even uses a multi-region and multi-sector general equilibrium model of the world economy and interestingly enough the database of the model covers over 90 countries, including Malta.

This form of analysis is relevant to economies of any size. Whatever the size of a country being analysed, the model is designed to measure the direct, indirect and induced economic impact of policy changes.

What is the bottom line that we are talking of with regard to Malta? What would be the effect of membership and of non-membership? The results are clear - black on white: "Simulation results, which also take account of the EU financial package, show that the overall impact of EU membership would be positive on the Maltese economy in the medium to long term. The real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) would grow by an additional 5.9% per cent which is equivalent to an additional Lm95 million of value added every single year".

The study has been conducted as regards what would be the effects of membership or non-membership over the next ten years.

While the overall impact of membership is positive, that of non-membership has been described as slightly negative on the real GDP. However, the report adds, given that the Central and East European ountries would in any case become EU members, the gap between Malta and these countries would in a non-membership scenario reverse after a relatively short period of time, and Malta would lose its ranking with respect to the EU average.

Graphs that accompany the study point out that in the No scenario, Malta would shortly lose its present competitive edge in comparison to Central and East European countries which have no qualms about becoming part of the EU in its next enlargement on May 1, 2004, and will therefore progress in leaps and bounds as opposed to our own country which would regress if the people had to miss out on this historic opportunity that has meant 13 years of hard work and preparations to make it happen.

The study takes into account that Malta's economy is an open one. We cannot opt for a closed economy or for an isolationist approach. The matter has been thoroughly explained by former Labour Finance Minister Lino Spiteri, who after making a quip about what a closed economy might look like on the isle of Filfla, explained that only the United States and China could opt for a closed economy system.

Mr Spiteri pointed out that if he is to cross the desert, he would rather do it on board a caravan together with others, rather than on his own. He also made it clear that the partnership and Switzerland in the Mediterranean are just slogans. "I need facts to change my opinion, not slogans" he said. He is one of the persons who has made a clear choice in favour of talking facts.

Mr Spiteri has made it clear that it is better for Malta to join than stay out of the EU, and when one weighed the pros and cons, it paid to be a member.

The results which emerge from the study carried out by Professor Bayar are in line with what EcoMod have been observing with regard to the EU's previous enlargement waves. In Ireland's case, for example, the gross domestic product (GDP) per head rose from 60-65% of the European average in the 1960s and 70s to nearly 80% in 1992, and then to well above the average from 1997 onwards (123% in 2000). On the same score, Portugal raised its GDP per head from nearly 55% of the EU average in 1986 to almost 74% after joining the EU. GDP per capita with respect to the EU average rose as well in Spain and Greece.

These are the sort of facts that the people have a right to know. They are resulting from scientifically objective analysis and mathematical models that do not rely on wishful thinking or plain deception to reach one conclusion instead of another.

Talking facts is embarrassing the present Labour leadership. It is, however, appealing to many genuine Labourites who rightly point out that they happen to care as much as any other person about our country, our children and our future. And that is why they are making a choice in favour first and foremost of facts and as a result of voting Yes on March 8.

People who are for talking facts are making their voices heard. Be it former Labour minister Lino Spiteri, former GWU Metal Workers Section secretary Mike Seychell, former Labour mayor of Cospicua Joe Carbonaro, well known Labour supporter Dr Frank Cassar, economist Godwin Cordina, or others, there is one major advantage about talking facts - it is one language supported by logic. It is a language that cannot be overcome by more scaremongering and lies. Truth and facts do prevail.

e-mail: info@franciszammitdimech.com

Website: www.franciszammitdimech.com