Under pressure General Workers' Union general secretary Tony Zarb is coming out fighting, as Steve Mallia found out.

How would you describe the experience of being general secretary in the past few weeks?

I never have a quiet moment as general secretary as there's always something going on. In recent weeks there have been these events that everyone knows about. But life goes on.

You were on holiday - were you keeping in touch with what was going on?

I was in touch all the time. My holiday had been booked for a year and it wasn't the case, as some people said, that I was running away because there were problems. On the contrary. I spoke to my colleagues in the union's administration before I left - up till that point nothing had happened. My colleagues in the administration told me that I could go and I was in constant touch with them.

In retrospect, do you regret being on holiday?

I couldn't do otherwise. When I left what happened while I was away hadn't happened. There was nothing in fact, or any indications that anything was about to happen.

Why do you think the section secretaries left?

It could be that they didn't feel comfortable working within the structure.

They're saying they were not allowed to lead their sections; that they had no autonomy.

That's not true. We shouldn't forget that the General Workers' Union is a general workers' union. Even though it has various sections, all of them are under the umbrella of the General Workers' Union - otherwise they'd be different unions.

But they have a degree of autonomy within that.

Of course. In fact each section has its own executive as well as representatives on the general council.

They're saying that you and (deputy general secretary) Geitu Mercieca were taking this autonomy away from them.

It's not true. Telling a person to stay within the parameters does not take away his autonomy.

Yet the port workers all agree with them, and not with you and Geitu Mercieca.

I had no problem with the port workers.

But they left.

Not because they had a problem with me.

Why do you think they left if they didn't have a problem with you?

The port workers felt they had to do that. In my opinion they made a mistake. They know that the conditions they enjoy today are due to the strength of the General Workers' Union.

But don't you think them leaving is a vote of no confidence in you?

At no time did they say that.

They were unhappy with the way the union was being run.

No. At no point did the port workers say that.

But they joined a group of people who were setting up a union.

Yes, that's the end result but that doesn't mean they did that because they didn't have confidence in the General Workers' Union.

How else could you interpret that?

There could be a number of reasons. It could be that there were people instigating them to do that - both inside and outside the union.

But can you see why people from the outside think that they left because they have no confidence in you?

No, I can't. Because they have never said that to me.

How big a blow is it to lose so many members from such an important strategic section in the union?

You need to look at how they reached that decision.

Let's not go there for the time being. The fact is that you lost them.

Yes.

That's a huge blow for the union, surely.

Yes, alright. We have lost these members, but in the past few weeks the union has taken on new members.

But in few sectors do you have as much strategic strength as you have in the port.

We still represent groups in the port that are strategic as well.

But you admit that you've lost a very big portion of your power.

I don't think anyone's pleased that the port workers no longer form part of the union.

It's a big blow

It's a blow.

You told The Times on August 16 that there was no internal rift within the union. Yet within a few weeks two section secretaries had resigned and you lost a number of members. Does this mean that you didn't know what was going on or that you were covering it up?

I didn't cover up anything. When I made those comments I felt that I should respond in that manner because that was the truth.

Which either means you weren't aware of what was going on...

...no, I was aware of everything.

So that means you were deciding not to...

The things that happened took place within a few days. And the team at the General Workers' Union is working a lot better now than it was before this happened.

Are you saying that you knew of nothing up till August 16?

I didn't say that... one section secretary had already been removed but that didn't mean there was a crisis in the General Workers' Union. There are lots of crises in the country, not in the General Workers' Union. There's a crisis in tourism, a crisis in employment, a crisis in how workers and their families can alleviate the burdens placed upon them. These are all crises that are far bigger than what the papers are saying about the General Workers' Union.

You said that there was no internal rift and then three section secretaries...

...two. One was removed and two resigned. So that we're clear.

Is this because you didn't know what was going on?

I didn't know they were going to resign.

If two people are about to resign, it doesn't normally happen overnight.

For me it was overnight. It could be that they left it for when I went abroad.

As of today would you accept that there has been an internal rift within the union?

Rift in the sense that we had two section secretaries and they resigned. It seems that they didn't feel comfortable working with us - who were elected by the delegates to run this union less than a year ago. And we were elected by a lot of votes. We shouldn't forget that.

But the workers they were representing chose to follow them, not you.

Which workers?

The port workers.

But the port workers are part of the section.

Do you rule out that in the coming weeks more workers will leave the union?

I don't know. I can't answer that question. God willing, no.

If a substantial number does leave...

...Why are you looking at the ones who are leaving and not the ones who are joining. Some are leaving, but others are joining us.

But it depends where you're losing them.

No. A member in one section and a member in another is a member for us.

So, in strategic terms, would you classify someone in the port in the same way as a member in a shoe factory?

No. What I'm saying is that in terms of members they're the same.

But in terms of strategic importance...

...strategic importance, there might be a difference.

There is a difference. If a substantial number of members leave in the coming weeks and they come from important sections, do you think this would further weaken your strategic position?

I can't say what's going to happen next week. We'll have to see what's going to happen and act according to the circumstances.

Would you contemplate resigning if more members leave the union?

No. I was elected by the delegates and when they feel that I should no longer lead the union, I will bow my head to that decision. But that's not the indication I have from them at the moment. On the contrary, a lot of them are telling me to stand firm so that we can continue to run this union.

Do you think the grass roots will agree with what the delegates are saying?

The delegates are elected by the grass roots and a great number of delegates have told us to carry on working in their interests. And that's what we'll do in the coming weeks.

This isn't the first time the union has had a problem within its ranks. Why did this one have to go so far?

It wasn't my doing.

But you're the head of the union.

But it wasn't my doing. I would be an idiot to create problems because I'm the head of the union. On the contrary, I don't want any problems.

But couldn't you have done more to fix the situation?

I did whatever I could do from my end.

The section secretaries accused you of undermining their section's work and autonomy.

That's not true. But everyone must understand that this is a general workers' union. Everyone is under that umbrella and everyone must operate within the structures of the union. Whoever doesn't want to work within the structures of the union is out of the structure.

Did you force anyone out of the union?

Out of those who resigned? No.

Do you think that, in the interests of the General Workers' Union, it might have been more sensible for you to step aside and find a compromise candidate who was capable of bringing the union together?

No I don't feel that. I still have something to contribute.

At the expense of the fragmentation that has...

...I still have something to contribute to the union.

But don't you agree that in the past weeks...

...When you face a storm in a big organisation, it does not mean that it will tear you apart. We'll get through this one as well.

But don't you think...

...We'll get through it as well because there are already discussions to get back on board some of the executive members that resigned.

Who's involved in these discussions?

I'm involved.

With how many people?

We'll see. We're still having talks. What I can say is that some of those who resigned will definitely come back to the union.

In terms of section secretaries?

No, in terms of executive members.

How many people are we talking about?

Now we'll see. I don't count my chickens before they hatch.

Karmenu Vella said that one of the reasons he resigned was because of the dismissal of Josephine Attard Sultana and he accused you of an abuse of power in that situation. Do you agree with him?

No, not at all. I didn't abuse any powers and acted in line with the statute of this union.

She took legitimate court action to stop an extraordinary general meeting that was designed to remove her. And she was successful. Doesn't this mean...

...and that meeting didn't happen. So we didn't act against the decision of the court.

But doesn't the fact that she managed to stop it through court action show you were abusing your power in the first place?

We had a request from more than 40 per cent of the delegates to hold this meeting. The rules of the General Workers' Union say that once 40 per cent request this it can happen.

But according to the court it shouldn't have taken place.

But the court didn't go into the issue of 40 per cent, but on a humanitarian basis in her regard.

So there was an abuse of power.

No, there wasn't. We're not here to abuse power. Far from it. We're here to ensure there's no abuse of power...

What's your problem with George Abela?

I don't have a problem with George Abela. He left the union because when he was a consultant he didn't want to respond letters we received from the Nationalist government when we were going to take industrial action over the budget. He refused to do that work so he could no longer remain as a consultant of the union.

So you don't listen to a legal consultant who's giving you legal advice.

That's not what I'm saying. He refused to do that task. If an employee refuses work, you ask him what he's doing here.

And you didn't even allow him onto the premises to address the port workers.

There was no reason to do so. The port workers had a place to hold the meeting.

But that shows that you've got something against him.

George Abela left the union. He no longer has anything to do with the union.

Which means that he can't even come onto the premises.

When someone leaves the union, I don't think one would be too pleased if he comes back here. I don't think George Abela would be too pleased at coming back here either.

Is your stand on George Abela political?

No. That's the only issue I had with him. That he refused (work) and abandoned the union at an important time.

Have you ever had any contact with the Labour Party regarding George Abela?

No. Never.

There was a report in The Times on August 13 that in 2003 you'd agreed to resign and then arranged to stay as long as you stay on the payroll till you're 61. It also said you'd agreed to appoint a general secretary designate in October, 2005. Is this true?

There were people that wanted to remove me from power - those that left the union recently were at the forefront of this - but the national council in 2003 decided otherwise, meaning that I will continue in my post as general secretary.

Had you offered to resign?

There was a rift and, as I said, the people that left the union recently wanted me to resign. But the national council had a different view... I was democratically elected with an 80 per cent majority. But all that has been forgotten.

But then the supporters of Manuel Micallef, who opposed you, have all left.

That's not true. That's not true.

Even though the facts speak otherwise.

Tell me who Manuel Micallef's supporters were?... I don't know if the plan was to cry sour grapes after they failed to reach them, or if they didn't want to abide by the decision of the delegates...

It could be seen as though the existing leadership wanted to drive them out because they supported Manuel Micallef.

That's not true.

But you do accept that people might see it like that.

That's if they want to reach certain conclusions - like you're doing at the moment. The question is should we abide by the decision of the delegates or not?

How long are you prepared to stay on as general secretary?

As long as the delegates want me...

What's the current membership of the union; some people are saying it's 25,000.

It's about 46,000 or 47,000... we have a count every three months and the last one was in June.

Would you be prepared to submit to an independent audit of your membership figures?

One would have to think about this, and think very hard.

So you wouldn't have an independent audit on your membership?

That's our business. Why should we let someone in from the outside to go into our business. Would your employers allow someone independent to come in and look at how newspapers are sold?

We're talking strictly to assess your membership figures.

No. That's our internal business. We send a document to the registrar of trade unions every year and we're not obliged to get someone in from the outside to look into our internal affairs.

But for the sake of transparency...

...so does transparency just apply to the General Workers' Union? Ask the political parties about that. I'm saying that these are our internal affairs. That's my response.

So you would not submit...

...don't put words into my mouth. My response is that these are internal matters for the General Workers' Union. That's my response.

So would you submit to it or not? Yes or no.

I'm telling you that that's my response. I have nothing to add to that.