The EU - new insights and perspectives

After Malta became independent in 1964, Prime Minister George Borg Oliver perceived that the island would need stronger ties with Europe if export growth was to take place. Entering into an Association Agreement with the then Common Market (which was signed in 1970) was therefore an economic necessity. In 1990 Dr Borg Olivier's successor, Eddie Fenech Adami, applied to join the European Union. A primary concern was that democracy should never be threatened again as happened during the Seventies and Eighties.

Surprisingly, the Malta Labour Party, in Opposition, took a negative stance to both these developments. It went to such lengths that shortly after taking office in October 1996, the Labour government froze Malta's EU application. Apparently, it thought that the costs of membership outweighed the benefits; it is possible that it did not want to contemplate a diminution of Malta's sovereignty and submission to Brussels; and, perhaps, it cherished more the exercise of political power within the country. Political pique can also be included in these considerations.

Whatever the reasons for freezing Malta's EU application, when the people were asked to vote on the question, a clear majority opted to join, thus proving that the country was not in tune with the MLP's policies and targets. The electorate's goals caused an MLP defeat in the general election that followed five weeks later, besides two changes in the MLP leadership. Yet the leader was given what can be termed a vote of confidence. Nevertheless, the MLP had to change its policies radically to finally respect the electorate's vote on the EU and accept membership.

The overriding principle for which the electorate, in its majority, opted for EU membership was certainly the perceived economic advantages that were expected to follow. There is some disillusionment now that the people are being asked to dig deeper into their pockets to fulfil EU rules and obligations, particularly insofar as public debt and the budget deficit are concerned. There is no doubt that families are enduring hardship because of new tax impositions and ever-rising fuel charges.

But there are huge benefits that can be attained by EU membership. The problem is whether Malta is doing enough to obtain them. In fact there were reports that showed that Malta was not really benefiting from all the funds and programmes available to member states. EU reports had raised this matter and it is now hoped that this will never be repeated because Malta is not in a position to forfeit financial benefits.

Clearly, Government and other official bodies have perceived the importance of Malta availing itself of all opportunities that come its way and have attempted to advertise, in a more tangible way, the existence of Malta's financial services by holding a conference in London.

What is debatable is whether it was a good idea to hold the conference in Europe's leading financial centre. The impression may be given that Malta can compete with London's legendary expertise in this field! Perhaps it would have been better to introduce Malta's strong areas, including financial services, with the equally new EU members and promote Malta as the potential bridge to North Africa, besides its other advantages.

Surely, there is a lot to be done. Unfortunately, the prevailing political situation in Malta is still one of infighting and inward-looking tendencies. The immense possibilities of outward-looking policies are still not appreciated enough. Maybe Malta has not yet overcome the partisan divide of recent decades.

In the past the people were fed information and given the impression that Malta was the centre of the universe, that it could compare itself to large and industrialised countries, and that it was not lagging behind. Political oratorical powers persuaded many Maltese to believe that other states should follow and implement Malta's fancies.

Everybody should appreciate the fact that EU membership has broadened the vista of a large section of the population, helped to provide deeper insights and clearer perspectives about Malta's true economic and social position when compared to other EU members, and has made it easier to access all information pertaining to new employment as well as academic opportunities.

The educational sector has benefited from the many programmes sponsored by EU education agencies; local councils, too, gained more experience through twinning projects; there have been many projects done with the help of EU funds; and, so far, Malta gained in financial terms through its Objective 1 status. If economic progress is actually achieved, next time round this status will no longer be available. It is therefore extremely important that Malta should redouble its efforts to ensure that all potential benefits are obtained.

Despite all this, EU membership has also meant less palatable truths. Whereas governments have the tendency to paint a rosy picture, and the Opposition to darken the picture as much as possible, various reports and statistical data of the EU not only provide correct and unbiased information but also compare results achieved in other member countries. These show that in many instances Malta ranks at the lower end of the scale or that it is not progressing at the same momentum as other EU members

For example, in innovation and business research and development Malta is faring really badly - it is at the bottom of the EU members' list; it is also outperformed by Romania and Bulgaria, which are still prospective EU members.

There have been data regarding education that show that Malta's efforts have to be increased substantially to match those of other EU members. Though improvements are registered, our country is still short in the area of supplying scientists and engineers. Yet Malta has a comparably good teacher-to-student ratio. Perhaps that may be why Malta obtains a better ranking in public expenditure dedicated to education and training, and in the number of active teachers it employs.

In terms of the gender gap and inactive population Malta ranks as the worst performer. Despite Government's efforts to entice more women to work by offering tax incentives to those who used to work, and subsidising child-minding centres to facilitate the move, the female participation rate is not encouraging at all. One may question whether what has been offered and what the ETC is doing to attract more people, particularly women, to the labour market is enough. Apparently, new ideas and approaches have to be contemplated because in this area Malta cannot afford to lag behind.

Unfortunately, until last year, reports indicated that Malta had the highest rate of tax increases among EU members. Moreover, car purchasers have to pay more taxes than their EU counterparts when buying a new car. But when comparing Malta's revenue collected from total taxation as a rate of GDP with the EU average, Malta's percentage tax revenue is gauged to be substantially lower.

Of course, Malta has its good points; but our approach should be to consolidate the areas where good performance is achieved and work really hard at those indicators that do not register the upward trends when compared with other EU members. In this way we remove the impression that Malta is a laggard in any area of operation.

Through EU membership, the Maltese are in a better position to know more about their country's attainments and shortcomings. They can also compare their quality of life and standard of living with those of other EU members. What is really important is that the Maltese have obtained new insights and clearer perspectives about their own country.