Editorial

Three cheers for the director general of the Malta Employers' Association, Joseph Farrugia, for so valiantly defending the interests of his association against the blanket criticism levelled by The Times the other day at the social partners for failing to come to an agreement over the social pact. He did so in a letter in which, replying to an editorial highlighting the need for action as a key to economic revival, he specifically blamed the trade unions for the lack of consensus over the drawing up of a social pact.

The Times has absolutely no fight to pick with the association or with Mr Farrugia but its reference to the social partners was made in a generic nature, in the same way as when it attributes to the political class generally the growing disenchantment with politics and politicians in the country today.

In fact, in the same editorial The Times then goes on to zero in on the trade unions, specifically pointing out that despite their protestations to the contrary, it is the trade unions that are failing to take the national interest into consideration. Of course, not all the unions were, or still are, to blame for the failure on the part of the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development to come out with a social pact.

But is not all this a useless exercise? The reaction of The Times is not meant to reply to the association's secretary's letter but to bring out the absurdity on the part of others of having to go nit-picking, as it were, when all efforts should be concentrated on reviving the move towards the formulation of a social pact.

Replying to comments reportedly made by Gejtu Vella, general secretary of the Union Haddiema Maghqudin, to the effect that the social pact could be drawn up even without consensus, Tony Zarb, general secretary of the General Workers' Union, said his union was prepared to resume the talks on the pact but one of two conditions he laid down for this was that there had to be consensus.

He said the GWU had turned down the package because the burden was going to be shouldered only by the workers. He added that for the union to take part in the resumption of the talks on the social pact they had to ensure that the burden be shared by those who could well take it. The GWU may well draw support to its argument if its own proposals are found to be reasonable. But are they?

What exactly is the part of the burden that the union wants the employers to share? Mr Zarb would not have made the argument had his union not made sure in advance that industry can well afford to take the burden. So, what exactly is industry expected to do today in order for Malta to regain the degree of competitiveness it has lost? And what part of the burden are the unions prepared to accept on behalf of the workers?

When such a key player as the GWU says it is now ready to take part in a resumption of talks, it is expected that a new effort be made by all the social partners to come to an agreement on what is needed to help Malta generate new growth in the interest of all. Now that is something that the social partners, all of them, should really concentrate their energies on rather than persist in finger-pointing.