One productive meeting I had during the past days was with the vice-president of the European parliament, Gerhard Schmid. Together with the other members of the working group that drafted Labour's proposed European Union policy, I met Gerhard - as he insisted on us calling him - at the end of his official visit in Malta.

After presiding for all his local official engagements together with the European parliament's secretary general, Gerhard met the working group in his capacity as a fellow social-democrat and a person who knows Malta well.

Meeting Gerhard confirmed a number of impressions I had about the European parliament. The first impression to be proved correct was that the European parliament is not a club of Euro-enthusiasts for whom Brussels is the be-all-and-end-all.

Far from it.

Those with this frame of mind in both Strasbourg and Brussels are in a minority. The majority consists of members who are relentlessly engaged in fighting in the best interests of their constituency and their country. Their voters elected them as Euro parliamentarians to do this and this is what they do. Gerhard himself explained that the effects that any EU legislation might have on his constituency is one of his top priorities.

Thus, those looking for a Brussels fan club in the European parliament would do well to look elsewhere. What Malta needs are people who are committed to change and not ready to accept the status quo simply because it is dictated by bigger players. If any EU legislation is not in Malta's interests, the people's representatives should stand up and be counted. They must work within all the possible fora, be it parliament or their own political groupings, to protect the country's interests.

Furthermore, their role should be proactive and not simply reactive, in the sense that they should take initiatives which would directly or indirectly benefit Maltese and Gozitans.

Back to the meeting with Gerhard Schmid. Much of the time was taken by a technical but extremely interesting discussion on the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and its effects on Maltese farmers and agro-industry. This discussion took place within the context of the World Trade Organisation talks which were at the time still underway in Cancun and which, unfortunately, failed to produce the desired results.

As things are, Malta does not stand to benefit from CAP. On one hand, our farmers do not produce the crops for which there are community subsidies. At the same time, Maltese farmers and agro-producers will now face even stiffer competition from their European counterparts who will practically have a total access to the market. One might argue that consumers stand to gain from such a development. This conclusion is right if one takes into consideration only this part of the argument. I believe that the other part is equally important.

In fact, one has to take into consideration the fact that being a member of the EU will make Malta subject to the Common External Tariff (CET). This tariff is a barrier for member states wanting to buy foodstuffs at cheaper international market prices rather than paying higher community prices. At the end of the day, consumers might end up with some benefit on one hand but will have to fork out more money on the other.

Claiming that the Maltese government will be paying for the difference between the two prices is no consolation since the government will be forking out money from the public coffers, that is taxpayers' money.

Now that Malta is a member of the EU, we must strive to bring about those changes in the CAP and in other areas from which our consumers, farmers and agro-food producers would benefit.

This is the role we must take. For supporters' club memberships, apply elsewhere!