Six of seven social partners insist on consensus

Six of the seven social partners sitting on the Malta Council for Economic and Social Development have insisted on consensus if any changes to the composition are to take place.

In their feedback to a letter from Public Dialogue Parliamentary Secretary Chris Said in August, the social partners said there had to be agreement if the Forum confederation and the Gozo Business Chamber were to sit on the council, a sticky issue that has been dragging on for months.

Forum is an umbrella organisation of 11 unions that represent close to 12,000 workers. It has been insisting on a seat on the council but the government has held that changes to the MCESD’s composition had to take place by consensus.

Dr Said’s letter, to which the social partners had to reply by last Tuesday, was sent soon after a council meeting when members rejected Forum’s request to sit on the council. Most of the council members complained that Forum’s inclusion would upset the balance between workers’ and employers’ representatives.

When contacted, a spokesman for Dr Said’s office confirmed that all but one of the social partners sitting on the MCESD had replied. Although he refused to say which organisation it was, sources said the Malta Employers’ Association had requested – and been granted – a one-week extension for more internal discussions.

The spokesman said the replies were confidential and were being evaluated. Thus, he could not reveal their contents, although he said they contained “interesting proposals”.

“The constituted bodies that have presented their reports are voicing the opinion that consensus is essential for any changes to take place,” he said.

The spokesman said once the reports were evaluated, the government would start a series of one-to-one meetings with all constituted bodies.

“They will focus on the common issues and the common proposals raised in the reports. The meetings will also serve for the government to try and achieve consensus on the way forward,” the spokesman said.

The Forum has been insisting on MCESD representation for a long time but the government argued it could not “just impose a change to the structure of the MCESD”. Although it had no objection to the request, the council’s membership had to be unanimously agreed by all social partners.

In a letter to Forum earlier this year, Dr Said noted that the MCESD had been set up by agreement between the social partners, which were its members. The government had agreed with the members that any expansion had to be done with the members’ consensus and it would not break its word through arbitrary imposition.

When contacted, Forum president John Bencini said the government should not continue hiding behind the word “consensus”, which, he said, did not feature in the MCESD law. Moreover, he said the council minutes did not record the agreement being mentioned by the government regarding the need of consensus for any changes to take place in the composition of the MCESD.

“The government should not be held to ransom by the few who want to exclude Forum from sitting on the MCESD. We will continue this battle until the eve of the election. The government should stop this policy of exclusivity and exclusion. If the government does not want us there, it has to have the guts and say it,” he said.

Mr Bencini also questioned the veracity of how many social partners were insisting on consensus. “We are informed that only two social partners want the decision to be taken by consensus,” he said.