Malta to adhere to treaties on patents registration

The House of Representatives yesterday started debating motions for Malta to adhere to the Patent Cooperation Treaty and the European Patents Convention.

Competitiveness Minister Censu Galea said that recognition and protection of patents was an essential ingredient of research and development as well as investment.

Malta had recently updated legislation on intellectual property and this process was now being continued with these motions. Malta was thus being brought up to date with European legislation on patent protection. Adherence to the European Convention would mean advantages for Malta, in that new products which were registered here would automatically be registered internationally. There are 132 signatory countries of the Patent Cooperation Treaty.

In its own way, the treaty on cooperation in patents spelt the need for Malta to be not only a member of the treaty but also an active party, thereby providing the necessary push for individuals to invest their time and money in new products. These individuals would know that the result of their investments would be recognised internationally, Mr Galea said.

Many requests for protection of intellectual property were lodged every year with the Department of Trade in Malta. This meant one could look forward with confidence.

Labour MP Chris Agius said it was clearly the time for Malta to adhere to these treaties, even if its delay in doing so had helped attract firms which produce generic pharmaceuticals - which would not now be affected by these motions.

Malta's adoption of these treaties, however, underlined the importance for Malta of having a serious and efficient Patents Office, especially as the number of patents being registered here, notably by pharmaceutical producers, was increasing to an average of 400 annually. He hoped that this development would lead to an upgrading of the Malta Patents Office both in equipment and manpower terms.

He observed that patents offices in EU member countries had different registration fees and a standard fee did not exist. Malta should not have a low fee so as not to look cheap, and because this could be a revenue earner.

Mr Agius insisted, however, that raising Malta's industrial competitiveness in line with the Lisbon agenda targets would not come about just through these measures. Malta needed to attract investment by reducing costs, notably government-induced costs. It also needed to better train its workers and raise education standards because Malta was at the bottom of the EU scoreboard of graduates, particularly in technical subjects.

Parliamentary Secretary Edwin Vassallo said the set-up of the Malta Patents Office had improved substantially in the past few years, and its efficiency was high.

He wanted more Maltese inventors to come forward and register their patents here, more so now that they would immediately enjoy recognition abroad.

One reason why Malta was ranking so low in the Lisbon scoreboard on innovation was because Maltese innovations, particularly by SMEs, were not being registered. Many did not know of the level of innovation that stemmed from the small industrial parks, such as the amphibious bus. One should not run away with the idea that innovation was the preserve of big spending industries or people holding PhDs. Indeed Malta had among the highest number of patent registrations per population among the new EU member states.

Mr Vassallo said membership of the convention and adherence to the treaty were essential for Malta as it sought to increasingly focus on innovation in industry. Having an efficient patents registration system would make Malta more attractive for investment along with the other areas which the government was already working on, such as better worker training and higher education standards.

Evarist Bartolo (MLP) said it was ironic that the most active industrial sector in Malta was currently that of generic medicines, which had benefited from the fact that patents had not been registered here. All this underlined the need for Malta to seek out new value-added activities.

It was important that drafters of Maltese legislation, including Bills which transposed EU laws, kept an eye on Maltese realities. One could vividly recall how last year, during legislation on intellectual property, the pharmaceutical companies in Malta and the 1,000 jobs that went with them would have been lost had the bill not been amended at the eleventh hour.

Mr Bartolo said there was a need for improved technical expertise at the Malta Patents Office for the examination of patent registrations.

He also insisted that Malta needed to bring about a culture change in its education system, with far greater emphasis on science and technology.

The debate continues today.