We have come to the final week when the Maltese electorate has to take a crucial decision: whether our country and its people should join the European Union or not. This is definitely the most important decision that, as nation, we have had to take since Independence in 1964, because it is a decision that will affect us in the years and generations to come. The dimension of this decision is national, not parochial or partisan. It is a decision that should not be guided by selfish interests but by the highest common good.
This decision is more important than a general election's. The consequence of a decision taken to elect a new government has a duration of five years; the consequence of this decision has a much longer duration. This is why splitting the referendum issue from the general election's was a very correct approach. It is common knowledge that voting at a referendum shall not be strictly on party lines but across the political party divide.
It shall not be easy to reverse this decision, given the scenario we are facing. Today's European Union shall not be the same one from May 1, 2004, because on that date it will incorporate 24 countries plus Malta (if we decide to join). So the EU of that time shall have priorities that are different to those of today, shall have interests that are different to those of today, shall have to cater for member states that are less well-off than us, and so would first direct its resources towards them before even starting to consider whether to direct any of its resources to Malta (if it remains a non-member).
The decision hinges on how the electorate perceives the results of the negotiations the Maltese government had with the European Commission. These negotiations reflected what the present member states of the EU wanted (yet another reason why the EU after May 2004 will be different, because the member states of the time will have different needs and expectations). There were certain issues that did not require lengthy negotiations, either because Malta already complied with the laws and regulations of the EU, or because these issues were perceived to be of benefit to our economy and the rest of the country.
They are an integral part of what has been referred to as the membership package as much as anything else. For example, the government did not bat an eyelid on the issue of guaranteed free access to EU markets, because that represents only a benefit to our economy. In fact, very little is said of these issues because they are taken for granted. However, if we decide to stay out of the EU they cannot be taken for granted anymore, as they are benefits that will be taken away, given they are only available to members.
Equally important were the issues connected with consumer protection. These were too important for the government to ask for any concessions because it would have killed one of the basic tenets for joining the EU - that of guaranteeing a better quality of life to the people. As such, Malta took on board the various pieces of legislation protecting the consumer, such as those relating to product liability, food safety and market liberalisation. Again, there is no guarantee these rights would remain if Malta were to stay out of the EU. We can continue listing issues we would lose out on if we stay out of the EU...
Then there are issues where the government has won concessions from the EU as a result of these negotiations. There were some issues where concessions were required to enable us to set up the right type of structures required to implement EU legislation, such as those relating to the environment. There are those issues where the government won concessions to protect the interests of particular segments of the economy and the rest of the population, such as those relating to incentives to industry and aid to certain enterprises. Very often, the requests for concessions were based on real, and not acquired, needs and had the specific objective of protecting employment opportunities. The debate on whether to join or not to join centred mainly on these latter issues.
Finally, there were the negotiations on the net contribution Malta shall receive from the EU budget. This shall be taken away from us if we do not become members and the Lm81 million the country shall be receiving as a net contribution from the EU shall have to be made good for from our own pockets, or through reduced government expenditure. Both mean that we will have to accept a lower standard of living if we do not join the EU.
The time to take a decision has come. It will not be a decision that shall be taken by the business sector alone, but by the entire electorate. However, it is definitely very significant that none of the organisations representing the business sector has spoken against membership and that, with the exception of one that has chosen to remain neutral on the issue, all have actually spoken in favour of membership.
The business sector is used to taking decisions after it has weighed the various pros and cons. It does not like to take decisions based on defensive strategies. It much rather takes decisions that aim to create new opportunities for itself and for its employees. A decision to join the EU is exactly this - a decision that creates new business opportunities, new employment opportunities and new opportunities for creating wealth.