Minister sees more changes to the Commercial Code

Interior Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici indicated on Wednesday that he intended to further amend the Commercial Code to make it more relevant to present-day needs and give adequate instruments to those engaged in trade, commerce and industry to help them carry out their activities better.

Moving the second reading of the Commercial Code (Amendment) Bill, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said that the time had come for the many laws dealing with trade and commerce to be incorporated in one piece of legislation. It was not an easy task but such legislation would give greater direction to traders, brokers, master mariners and all those engaged in trade, commerce and industry, now united under the umbrella of the new Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry which has replaced the Malta Chamber of Commerce and the Federation of Industry.

Commerce was vital for Malta and, throughout the years, the government had introduced various instruments to make commercial operations easier. These included the Tribunal for Small Claims, the Arbitration Centre and the Centre for Mediation.

The amendment under discussion was necessary because of the amalgamation between the Chamber and the Federation. Dr Mifsud Bonnici said this was not a cosmetic change but an important one which gave official government recognition to the fusion of the two organisations.

The minister welcomed the move which, he said, would save the two organisations time, money and resources because it would do away with duplication. The two chambers represented different operators in specialised sectors who had opted to unite to have a sounder base. The move was logical and would do away with any conflicts which might have developed during the years between the two organisations.

He said that in 1987, the Chamber of Commerce was recognised by the government as the self-regulatory body of people in business. The government's recognition brought more order among the operators of the commercial sector because the Chamber became more vigilant not only to safeguard its members' interests but also to see fairness in their dealings with consumers.

Opposition spokesman for industry Carmelo Abela said the government could not continue down the road it had taken, deciding on matters such as new water and electricity rates, without consulting the social partners.

Mr Abela said the opposition understood the difficult times the world was going through but the government could not take measures on a national level which further burdened the local market.

The government could not continue ignoring the social partners; consultation was still not taking place.

Industrialist Louis Farrugia, in Wednesday's The Times, pointed out that the proposed increases in the utility rates would mean a 300 per cent increase in expenses. This, Mr Abela said, was madness especially because it was going to be retroactive to October 1 and tourism and industry could not plan for it.

It was therefore important for the government to rethink the situation and start discussing it with the constituted bodies. If the government did not take this appeal seriously, the country could face self-created difficulties.

Mr Abela warned that the proposed government's action was highly irresponsible as it would endanger competitiveness and jobs. And contrary to what some people believed, it was not in the opposition's interest that things went wrong because the opposition wanted the best for the country and there were the interests of families at stake.

The government's biggest problem, Mr Abela said, was credibility. Its tune was different now than that before the election. Although the international financial crisis had exploded only recently, the signs had been there since 2007.

He pointed out that the country's deficit in the first eight months was more than €260 million when the government's aim for this year was for this to be slightly more than €67 million. It was so much higher than planned because the government had been wasteful during the election period.

Mr Abela hoped that once amalgamated into one body, the chamber and the federation would continue to be useful to their members. He extended Labour's invitation that the party was there to help and listen to them.

The opposition would be voting in favour of the Bill and it was up to the new organisation to ensure that the amalgamation agreed upon on paper was beneficial and protected the interests of all members, be they industrialists or businessmen.

Nationalist MP Franco Debono said he hoped the new Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry would be a success. This historic union would pool specialist and technical resources to increase efficiency.

It was important to have faith in the business sector for it to prosper. Sometimes this was felt more when it was lacking. The crisis in the sector was real and this lack of faith was reflected by the fact that banks refused to lend each other. In Malta it had been proven that foundations were sound and the impact of this contagion had not hit Malta too hard.

Mr Abela had claimed the government had moved ahead on energy tariff increases without consultation. This was not the case. Most of those participating in discussions had agreed that it was indeed time for the revision of tariffs. The tariffs, however, were not final.

On the other hand, ignoring the rocketing prices of oil at the time, the opposition had promised to reduce the surcharge by half.

Dr Debono said the minister had mentioned various measures which were practical for businesses and which should increase the people's faith in the sector.

Labour MP Owen Bonnici said that at first glance, one wondered how such an amalgamation could be made. An industrialist was a trader but a trader was not per force an industrialist.

However, from a practical angle, both the Chamber of Commerce and the Federation of Industry saw the benefits of consolidation.

The amendment under discussion was by its very nature a cosmetic one, but had great weight from the legislative angle. Amalgamation came at a time of great financial and economic chaos on both sides of the Atlantic and any debate in the House on the Bill must be held in this scenario.

Dr Bonnici differentiated between the sole trader, the limited liability company and the limited liability cooperative. He said that while the latter two groups provided protection to their operatives if things went wrong, the sole trader was totally uncovered.

The debate continues.