A flawed consultation structure

The National Euro Changeover Committee has been issuing various communications to give the impression that the whole process leading to the adoption of the euro is plain sailing. The reality is however far different as the difficulties encountered in the consultation process due to the way the NECC has been structured are significant.

The Chamber for Small and Medium Enterprises - GRTU has from the initial stages of the NECC's life asked the government and the committee's chairman to be very cautious on how it would address the various issues. In spite of this, the NECC started on the wrong foot when it had no representation of the private sector at all. As months passed by its structure was changed and there is now supposed to be representation of the various private sector bodies.

The biggest mistake was, however, that the private sector committees and task forces were never put in a position where they can function as they should. It must be emphasised first of all that none of the committees was provided with the required resources in spite of the various requests made. Apart from that, the executive committee has been acting in such a manner that the message of the private sector does not arrive at the appropriate destination.

Certain people might be asking why the government should consult with the private sector on the euro changeover. The success of a smooth changeover is highly dependant on private enterprise, particularly on retailers. There would be enough valid reason why to consult the private sector even if only because of the mass cash backflow of the lira that will occur thanks to the service provided by the retailers for free. Private enterprise will voluntarily work towards the education and empowerment of the consumer with respect to the euro. Furthermore, private enterprise will be faced with strategic and operational risks and opportunities that could lead to added costs. Also, any wrong decision made by the government might lead to added costs to private enterprise. In this light, it is not even thinkable that private enterprise is left out of the formula.

The NECC is, however, doing its best to ensure that the voice and input of private enterprise is either stifled or muddled up. The NECC is always coming to the table with decisions already made. Cosmetic changes are then made in order to be able to claim that suggestions were taken into consideration. There were occasions whereby the recommendations of the private sector were totally ignored, the NECC issued a document claiming it was the result of consultation. I wonder what sort of consultation there could be when the private sector was totally ignored in the first place (at draft level), when a document was produced without the necessary background research as the impact on enterprise and when certain comments are being rejected without valid reasons.

If anything similar happens in a private professional enterprise we would send the person in charge back to the drawing board to do the appropriate fieldwork first. However, it is convenient for the NECC to shift the responsibility of such a-not-professional way of doing things onto the members of the advisory group which, I repeat, were not provided with the appropriate resources.

One certainly cannot give the appropriate feedback and recommendations in such an environment where hours and hours of work are thrown down the drain just because of the manner in which certain parts of the structure operate. In fact, the GRTU is withdrawing its participation from the NECC until the committee's structures are reviewed in order that it becomes more sensitive to the real issues in the changeover. These are the reasons for the GRTU's withdrawal:

The scope and aim of the consultative committee is not clear. The committee is not a steering committee nor a decision making committee. Yet, every time the executive committee goes public, it incorporates in it the members of the consultative committee.

The executive committee goes public on issues that have never been discussed at consultative committee level. Furthermore, it is not acceptable that such committee states that there was agreement on issues that have not been discussed or on which there was no agreement at all.

Major issues have been discussed at the consultative committee before the private sector was represented and these issues have not been put on the table again for discussion. These are the said Bill on Euro Adoption and other issues such as optional dual pricing.

In spite of the fact that on certain issues the private sector has been proactive as encouraged by the chairman, the executive committee has totally ignored certain recommendations. This in spite of the detailed analysis carried out by the private sector which took into consideration also the costs to enterprise.

Within the current set-up there is no place to raise certain issues as the chairman rightly moves on to discuss strategic issues at the consultative committee while the NECC executive committee says that even operational issues already discussed at sub-committee level need to be re-discussed at consultative committee level. The result of all this is that the recommendations are again ignored.

The NECC consultative committee is requiring feedback within unrealistic deadlines which do not allow for appropriate analysis. Furthermore, the analysis is required in pre-defined formats. It seems the executive committee is turning the euro changeover into a form compiling exercise. This further shows there is no real awareness of the issues within the committee itself.

The NECC tried to avoid discussion with the main representative bodies on certain issues such as cash registers. In fact, a meeting was called for cash register suppliers and the GRTU and other bodies had to discover this through their members. It must also be noted that the VAT Department called such meeting for and on behalf of NECC and that not all cash register providers were invited to the meeting.

There were also occasions were the NECC executive committee refused feedback from the GRTU saying they could only accept it through committees, committees which were formed a couple of days before certain deadlines!

The NECC executive committee is coming up with issues without substantiating them through appropriate analysis.

The private sector has not been provided with the necessary tools to give the necessary input.

The private sector was not made aware of certain activities being held regarding the euro.

The private sector is and has been informed on certain issue only through the mass media. The examples are: optional dual pricing, the dual pricing date, the publication of the handbook, the Euro Adoption Act and so on.

The NECC executive committee has no real experts on economics or on the euro.

The Maltese reality is not being considered in this process.

The NECC is heading towards a total failure and this only because it is refusing what the experts in the various sectors are saying. The NECC has reached an unacceptable level of arrogance whereby it wants to give the impression that it is being consultative and then one person decides based on his personal impressions of how the market works.

The GRTU refuses that any member sitting on the NECC speaks on its behalf especially when it has not been consulted.

The euro is an important step for our country and I am convinced that Malta will reap the benefits of such adoption. However, it is my belief that, given the current structure of the NECC and the way it is not functioning, the process will become even more difficult. Even the way the NECC is reacting to the criticism on the matter shows it is failing to recognise the real issues of the euro adoption. In this light, one cannot but appeal to the Parliamentary Secretary at the Ministry of Finance and to the chairman of the NECC to review the committee's current operation and to seek real consultation and not confrontation on such a delicate issue.

Mr Buttigieg is spokesman of the Chamber of Small and Medium Enterprise - GRTU on euro matters and partner in Erremme Business Advisors who has done consultancy work on the euro in the first wave countries.