Good tools used badly

Vested interests and political sentiments seem to pervade Maltese society and institutions and they blinker our vision and block our minds. It appears we cannot rise above petty sectarian interests, perceive that through national economic growth everybody benefits and, for this end, exploit the available tools and machinery to help us in our endeavour.

It was a good idea to set up the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development. Its original purpose was the creation of a forum where social partners could meet the government and discuss economic and social problems and recommend to the government the best policy to adopt.

The question to ask is whether its composition includes all economic and social agents that play a role within the country or, to put it differently, whether it is representative of all institutions and organisations that are carrying out an economic and social function. Some organisations complain they are not represented.

Irrespective of its composition, the present set-up has led to a bottleneck because the original high ideals were changed. When MCESD was set up, its function was to serve as a consultative body. It had the right to discuss economic and social issues and attempt to suggest remedies.

Having employers and trade unions on board, it is highly improbable that solid consensus will be reached on the most sensitive issues. Unions eagerly seek increases in wages/salaries and benefits but these are costs to employers who will certainly oppose such recommendations. A compromise is not always possible.

But there is a middle way; wage and benefits increases should not be related only to inflationary trends but also to productivity and profits.

Again, this may be debatable as all these entail better administration of companies, firms and establishments and access to information pertaining to their performance.

The MCESD members have not considered these points because they have been more concerned with policy issues tackled by the government.

Instead of devoting so much time and energy on government measures they should first try to iron out their differences and, as mature and responsible people, come up with a common platform that regularises their behaviour and modus operandi.

A serious attempt to formulate a social pact was made during the MCESD deliberations but nothing came out of it because the General Workers' Union did not agree with a number of conditions leading to its finalisation.

Apparently, the GWU has been the odd man out within the institution. It is the only organisation that tends to disagree with the most important conclusions reached.

One gets the impression that its approaches to national problems are still suspect in that it has never set people's minds at rest that it is free of political ties.

On account of this situation, a new idea is evolving that conclusions within the MCESD should be voted upon and that the government should adhere to majority voting.

Now this goes against the original objective of the institution.

Were this idea to be effectively implemented, the government would be limiting its responsibility to selected corporate bodies and not to the people at large.

One has to remark that there are other organisations representing people and yet do not form part of the MCESD.

Another point worth considering is that were the MCESD's decisions to be binding on the government, as a result of majority voting, it would then become a public forum influencing the policy maker within the country.

In such circumstances, journalists should be admitted to the council's deliberations and report what took place and who said what.

Truly, Malta does not need another mini-Parliament; far too many words are uttered and reported, leading us to continually miss the wood for the trees.

The best solution is to forget all about majority voting and consensus. The MCESD is best kept as a forum where all social partners meet to discuss but not to determine economic and social issues.

It is up to the government to choose those ideas and recommendations, irrespective of who provided them, that would help it formulate its national policies.

After all, the government is answerable to all the people.