It is sad that the country has to go through such painful shocks practically every time big decisions are taken. Some may well consider this par for the course in a democracy.

However, there is a cost to be paid for an inability of opposing forces to come to terms in time. The problem for Malta is that the island is far too small to afford repeated confrontations, which so often lead to unnecessary rancour and more difficulties to those directly involved than originally thought of by those putting up opposition. Take the latest case, that of the planned privatisation of the shipyards, for example. Malta can hardly afford having a disagreement between the government and the workers' union ruin these plans.

Maybe the government could have started consultations over the planned privatisation earlier than it did, but the union needs to tread very carefully now if it really wants to look after the interests of the workers it represents. It is generally agreed today that, as the reform programme, launched with so much fanfare seven years ago, has failed to make the shipyards financially viable, the best way forward is for the government to put the assets into the hands of professional operators. The reform programme ends at the end of this year, by which time the government would no longer be allowed by the European Union to continue subsidising the shipyards. This means time is pressing, which is why the government has been so anxious to come to terms with the GWU over the early retirement schemes. Its aim is to reduce the number of workers by 1,000 to 700 because it believes this will make the shipyards more attractive to prospective bidders.

The union, which has accused the government of making impositions and which has so often urged the government to seek solutions through consultation, has chosen to give a new definition to consultation by passing a resolution making its own impositions. It is insisting that the early retirement schemes be issued only after the prospective buyer, or buyers are known, and that the employment of those who opt out of the schemes be guaranteed. Even at this late stage, the first demand should not be thrown out of the window as it does make sense. A stumbling block is the second, the demand for job guarantee.

Once the GWU is not opposing privatisation, or the early retirement schemes, it would be a pity if rigid stands were to lead to a disruption of the privatisation plans. Disruption will only bring about bankruptcy and closure of the shipyards, which would in turn lead to the loss of all the jobs. This would be against the interest of both the workers and the country as closure would lead to the non-utilisation of valuable assets.

Even though the early retirement schemes have already been launched, there is still time for the government and union to iron out their differences. One way would be for the government to mark time on the conclusion of the early retirement schemes until the manpower issue is settled with the best bidder, and for the union to drop its demand for job guarantee. This will clear the way for the privatisation of the shipyards.