No third chance

The words of Jean-Claude Juncker, the prime minister of Luxembourg should be clear to all. Asked by Jesmond Bonello of The Times what would be the position of the European Union if the people of Malta vote against EU membership, he replied: "If the Maltese say 'no' in the referendum, after having withdrawn their candidature in 1996, there will be no third chance".

He added that this is no joking matter. This is a serious issue. As I accompanied Mr Juncker, I could appreciate his European vision and equally the fact that he keeps his feet on the ground. He has a frank and open manner and expresses himself clearly.

As prime minister of the country that is the highest net contributor to the European Union, he speaks with conviction and credibility.

His personal and his government's support to our country over sensitive and difficult issues that await us in the final stage of negotiations to join the EU is highly welcome. Again he did not mince his words. Malta will have the support of Luxembourg on taxation issues, in particular about maintaining the status quo with regard to no VAT on food and medicinals until there are other countries in the EU which do the same. Equally we will have the support of Luxembourg on budgetary issues and on the question of our desire to have six as opposed to five Members in the European Parliament.

Mr Juncker heads the government of the most successful member state in the EU. Representing a country whose population size (400,000) is similar to our own, his message offers inspiration to all well-meaning persons in Malta. As he pointed out, the success of Luxembourg with the highest Gross Domestic Product per capita is a direct result of its EU membership. There is no 'stand-alone' strategy, especially for small countries, he added, and the successes of Luxembourg can be explained only by his country's belonging to the EU.

His message as well as his track record gives the lie to those who try to draw up a picture of a European Union dominated by the larger countries where small countries are swallowed up and have no say. The reverse is true. It is the countries that opt to stay outside that end up with having to follow all that is decided within the EU, without having had the opportunity to state their case, to influence matters.

Mr Juncker referred to Luxembourg's own turbulent history where it had to suffer repeated invasions, not least in the two world wars despite its neutrality, and in general where it had to follow what the countries that surround it decide. "Now they have to ask what our position is, and take it into account."

The influence exercised by the prime minister of Luxembourg on other member states is recognised by analysts outside Luxembourg. Only recently a feature in The Economist acknowledged Jean-Claude Juncker's strategy in promoting further European integration and how he is succeeding.

In a recent publication on the EU entitled Unity in Diversity, Mr Juncker pointed out, "We Luxembourgers believe that European integration should establish a permanent order on our continent based on the values of freedom, democracy, and solidarity that we all share and respect." He believes that the Europe of the 21st century must not resemble that of the 20th century with its unending conflicts and divisions in two camps.

Luxembourg, as a small country situated between France and Germany, has experienced the most tragic episodes of its history at times of armed conflict between its two neighbours. Luxembourg has now built its prosperity through the peace and stability that the EU has represented within its borders since its very inception.

Writing for the Financial Times Survey last June, Daniel Dombey, stated that there is no getting away from it: Luxembourg is very small. It is easy to bump into someone you know. The description sounds familiar enough to our own ears. Yet, the Grand Duchy has no fewer than 185 banks with €720 billion of assets and 24,000 employees.

Luxembourg could not have achieved such success and other milestone achievements by trying to do it on its own, without forming part of the European Union. Within the Union, its strength and influence is not in proportion to its geographic area or the size of its population, practically identical to our own. Within the EU, it has been able to secure its future and there have been no regrets.

When Mr Juncker presided over the European Council in the second half of 1997, he regretted that Malta was then no longer part of the enlargement process. He knew that we were missing a unique and historic opportunity. As a nation, we have been lucky to have been able not only to pick the pieces again and place them together but also to rank at the forefront of the enlargement process all over again. But there will be no third chance. In many ways, it is now or never. We have a historic opportunity that faces us.

It is our crucial hour where we cannot let our country and its future down. It is not a question of opting for EU membership or keeping the present status quo. It is a question of choosing which of two roads we want to take - is it the road of joining the European family to which we belong and have an active say on the way we would like to shape our future in our interest and in that of future generations, or is it the road of isolation, drifting without direction, having to follow decisions where we do not have any say in their formulation and trying to make it on our own when the Union will then have no fewer than 25 member states in its fold?

That is why our country is very much at the crossroads. We know that negotiations on joining the EU have to be concluded by the end of the year. That's less than three months away. Other items on the rest of our national agenda, not least the Budget that is expected next month, are bound to keep us busy. Time between now and the end of the year is bound to fly and at a faster rate than ever before.

Following the closure of negotiations, the hour of truth would not be far away. Voting in the national referendum is voting about the total package that Malta would have negotiated in its best interests. It will be a vote of national importance that calls out for the highest level of responsibility from each and every one of us. It is a national call, despite how much there could be elements that try to portray it in partisan hues.

Significantly, during Mr Juncker's visit, an agreement between Malta and Luxembourg was signed dealing what the two countries can achieve together in the field of youth, be it through exchanges, voluntary work, training programmes, benefits, the Youth programme as well as the Euro-Mediterranean Youth Action Programme. The agreement should also lead to closer co-operation between the National Youth Councils in our respective countries.

Both Malta and Luxembourg prove that small is not only beautiful but can also carry with it influence and weight. This is the more so when 'small' does not try to choose the patch of isolation but seeks to work within a wider perspective.

Mr Juncker's achievements include his presiding over the extraordinary European Council on employment in November 1997. That gave rise to the "Luxembourg process" requiring member states to annually submit an action plan in favour of employment and to meet quantified and verifiable criteria in terms of job creation.

Its social dimension makes the European Union more directly relevant to every citizen. It provides for rights and opportunities that have a bearing on the kind of future that we would like to shape for ourselves.

Malta deserves no less than Luxembourg and the other EU member states. The opportunity faces us right now in this historic hour and the people of Malta will not fail to grasp this opportunity, no matter how many voices of discord try to mislead us.

We are capable and mature enough to make the right decision. Mr Juncker's message in the meantime has given us more realistic food for thought about the historic significance of this decision and has provided us with further courage.