No 'alternative' to shipyards' privatisation
Privatisation was a good option for Malta Shipyards even if it was making a profit, the Finance Ministry said yesterday.
It said recent economic history had shown that privatisation was beneficial for the country's social and economic development as well as for the company's employees.
The ministry said it agreed with a structured dialogue with the General Workers' Union to discuss voluntary retirement schemes. However, the government felt that the time for new forms of debate was over since there was no alternative to privatisation.
"The country has experimented with these alternatives - which led to an accumulated financial burden of more than €770 (Lm330.56) million - for a long time," it said.
The ministry said there are two important aspects in the process of privatisation - the adjudication itself which will be led by the ministry's Privatisation Unit, and the way in which workers' interests will be safeguarded.
The ministry said that the various studies carried out over the years and regular evaluation processes showed that the shipyards' viability relied on the number of workers it employed.
When the privatisation decision was announced, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi said the 1,700 workers currently employed had to be reduced drastically, although he stopped short of giving a number.
The ministry invited the GWU for a meeting on Friday to discuss the voluntary retirement schemes.
GWU general secretary Tony Zarb appealed to the government to stop using the shipyards for partisan purposes. It said the issue should be a national project for the sake of the workers involved.
Labour leader Joseph Muscat insisted that his party would stick by its offer to cooperate on national issues, which included the shipyards.
Should the government agree to the GWU offer to set up a task force on the shipyards, the MLP would take part in the talks without imposing any conditions, Dr Muscat said. The ball was in the government's court.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
Updated: Shot migrant in critical...
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Yana Mintoff: Family speaking to...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
4 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
R.Spagnol
Jun 23rd 2008, 11:51
For all those justifying this government's arrogant performances, they should first read the letter sent by Dr.Gonzi itself to the MDD workers before the election. He promised them better working conditions, better tax systems and also more money to earn.
Nationalist governments ought to have taken care of the shipyards long before we joined the EU. The 2008 was the government's deadline to provide certain data and take certain measures regarding the national shipyards. Now it is too late and similar to the case of the Sea Malta, the government is in a panic to get rid of what he is referring to as a "burden". I don't think that this is the best way to promote your product!!!
Charles Camilleri might have done better if he commented about the true situation in the MDD and what is really making it drown. It would have been much better if he chose not to attack the workers and started to pinpoint the true facts of the MDD's failures. Last and not the least he should mention the number of foreigners working at the Shipyards such as Bulgarians who are purposed to aid the insufficient number of Maltese workers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
N. Aquilina
Jun 23rd 2008, 09:51
Dear Mr. Camilleri
RE. Quote:"Many factories have closed down and the workers had to find another job. Why should MDD's workers be treated differently? "
I take it, you are saying " If I lose my job, I don't get any benefits so why should Mdd workers get benefits?"(this reeks of Jealously)
Wouldn't it be better if you were to say" I am glad that Mdd workers are getting compensated and I think we should pass a law that states that all workers be treated in the same way"
Other European countries that have had the same problems as Mdd in their dockyards have
given their workers appropriate compensations. (workers over 55+ have been given full wages until pension age+ pension). Why should our workers be treated differently and be made redundant to find another job as you suggest.
Have a nice day!
Charles Camilleri
Jun 22nd 2008, 17:28
Dear Mr Attard, from what you wrote it is clear that you never approach the doors of MDD. In my opinion you should first put some pertinent questions to the the GWU that frustrated all past Government's efforts to increase productivity in the yard. The Government after squandering more than Lm 300 million has now no more options left but to privatise the yard or close it down. Many factories have closed down and the workers had to find an other job. Why should MDD's workers be treated differently?
d.attard
Jun 22nd 2008, 10:52
Government's 2003 plan for MDD to become viable by 2008 failed miserably.
Government reduced the number of employees from 2600 to 1700. Yet it now concedes that a viable MDD needs to carry a much smaller work force than 1700. How did it get this crucial number so wrong, dooming from the outset the future of MDD?
Government lost a great opportunity for the MDD because as Government concedes, the present business climate for ship-repair is optimal.
And how does Government explain the fact that MDD related debt since 2003 amounts to
£300,000,000 when if it had sent all employees home and paid them their salary, the salary cost would not have exceeded £85,000,000 by much. How does Government explain the remaining £200,000,000 gap?
What surprises me most is that despite this and other Government fumblings on the MDD issue, Government still adopts an 'I know it all' attitude and instead of taking up the positive benefits from the fresh breeze in politics coming from the Joseph factor, it continues to insist on slamming doors. Pity.