Vella calls for renegotiation of aspects of EU accession treaty

Opposition EU spokesman George Vella yesterday called for a renegotiation of aspects of the EU accession treaty. He also referred to Malta's participation in the European Defence Agency and called for a serious and mature debate on what Malta should expect to receive from others, should it have the need, and what assistance it was ready to give to others, always in respect of its constitutional norms.

Speaking during the Budget debate on foreign affairs, Dr Vella said that following the people's choice at the election everybody knew the MLP's position on the EU. Opposition leader Alfred Sant had promised that the party would work for Malta to get the best out of EU membership, easing what it viewed as negative consequences of the accession deal negotiated by the Maltese government with the EU.

The MLP had also argued that there were grounds to renegotiate the way some EU regulations were applied so as not to have a negative impact on Malta.

Dr Vella asked Maltese staff members working in Brussels were selected and what chance Labourites had to be chosen.

He criticised the way the government had spent Lm10 million on a Brussels property which had to be completely redeveloped.

What did the future hold for Malta's embassies in EU countries? Could Malta afford so many embassies in the EU when ministers met regularly in Brussels?

Why was no funding being provided for MiC (the Malta-EU information Centre)? What was its future?

Dr Vella praised the way the parliamentary European and Foreign Affairs Committee, headed by Jason Azzopardi (PN), was being run but said scrutiny of proposed EU laws should focus more on economic and financial matters and debate should in all cases be held before governments took their stand.

What was MEUSAC (the Malta EU steering and action committee) doing? Was it still meeting? The MLP had said that Meusac should become a parliamentary institution answering to the House of Representatives and be given new terms of reference.

Dr Vella said the lack of Maltese translators in Brussels was shameful and reflected lack of preparedness for EU membership. The government had even negotiated a three-month derogation on the EU obligation to translate documents into Maltese. This arrangement had set a precedent which should allow Malta to also renegotiate some aspects of its accession deals which affected Malta.

The government had promised heaven on earth once Malta joined the EU. Yet university graduates were not finding work, Malta's competitiveness had slipped, there were calls for a wage freeze and the day when Malta would adopt the euro was unknown.

Because of EU membership Malta was now spending an extra Lm6 million on sugar imports.

EU regulations such as those on the registration of medicines, though not wrong in themselves, had led to an explosion of prices, another reason why both sides should insist that Malta be allowed to renegotiate aspects of the accession treaty.

It was shameful that Malta had not received any assistance under the Life environment programme and the EU programme related to illegal immigration.

What was the situation regarding the EU Budget? He was receiving reports that Malta could initially start as an objective one country, eligible for the highest level of assistance, but then be phased out to a lower level. Was this correct?

Would Malta be arraigned before the European Court for not achieving all its commitments in the environment sector?

Dr Vella said farmers were saying that promises made by the government were not being honoured. Safeguard clauses negotiated with the accession treaty were not being enforced. This was another case where both sides should press for a revision of the accession treaty. Farmers were suffering as a result of accession.

Another example where the Maltese government had not negotiated well with the EU was over visa arrangements with Libya.

Dr Vella said Malta still had to decide its stand on the Working Time Directive. He felt Malta should insist on the opt-out clause letting countries decide whether their workers could work beyond the established time limits.

Dr Vella said Malta should work for closer relations between the EU and Libya, not least in the Euro-Med process. As for Turkey's accession bid, it was worth noting that the West had always relied on Turkey when it needed it. Once Turkey was democratic, its parliament was not influenced by the military, it recognised Cyprus and it respected human rights, there was no reason why the accession bid should be looked at differently from other countries. Indeed, the EU had already accepted former foes from Eastern Europe.

Dr Vella said the Opposition agreed with the government's stand on the EU efforts to penalise polluting ships. It also agreed with the government against the harmonisation of the tax regime.

The government, however, should hold proper consultations on the proposed Reach programme on the registration of chemicals and on the proposed services directive, not least because there could be negative consequences on SMEs.

Turning to Malta's participation in the European Defence Agency, Dr Vella observed that the EU was now preparing to form armed battle groups. Malta was getting too close to participation in a military alliance, which would go against the constitution. It was also true that neutral countries had a right to take measures and establish bilateral arrangements for their own defence with military bodies.

The time had come for a calm, serious and mature analysis of what Malta should expect to receive from others, should it have the need, and what assistance it was ready to give to others, always with respect of its constitutional norms.

There was also need for an analysis of the role of the national parliament to ensure that the rights of the House were not eroded.

Dr Vella said the budget debate was not the occasion to discuss the EU constitution, but he was happy to note that the government had eased its urgency to ratify the constitutional treaty. The MLP's position on the constitution was still being formed and the MLP was currently neither for, nor against, the constitution.

Concluding, Dr Vella spoke warmly of the MLP's relationship with the Party of European Socialists, saying both spoke the same language and wanted the same future for the EU, a Europe where there was more social cohesion, greater respect for consumers, minorities and the environment and greater social considerations which were now overshadowed by free market laws.

Leo Brincat, opposition foreign affairs spokesman asked the foreign minister to explain plans for the rationalisation of Malta's embassies.

The budget included the provision of Lm600,000 for a new embassy which he believed would be in Lisbon but the minister should clarify.

Why were Lm25,000 being voted for Malta's embassy in Baghdad?

He referred to the Commonwealth meeting in Malta next year and asked the minister to guarantee that no supplementary estimates would be sought for this conference. Now that the conference was being held here, the government should take the opportunity to promote Malta as a tourism destination and make contacts with the foreign businessmen who would be here.

Another Lm400,000 were being voted for the Forum for Europe. Could this be a replacement to MiC? Mr Brincat asked.

Mr Brincat asked how Dr Frendo had followed up former Foreign Minister John Dalli' visit to Washington. What had become of plans for a new double taxation agreement with the US? This issue had been discussed between Mr Dalli and Colin Powell, but what issues had been discussed and what was Mr Powell's reaction?

He pointed out that while delegations from many countries were visiting Libya accompanied by large numbers of businessmen, the Maltese government had not taken any businessmen in any of its visits. If no action was taken immediately, Malta would be too late in exploiting opportunities there.