Category: Archive – 2011

The new bus schedules and practical running experience is definitely positive. Only the very ambitious expected that in July the complete overhaul of Malta's public transport system would immediately go in perfect synchronisation. Has anything in Malta ever been perfect? Definitely not the busing system.

Malta's old bus system was probably the worst in the whole of Europe, more a resemblance of Africa and the poorest Latin American countries than anything that by any stretch of the imagination can be called European. GRTU struggled hard to obtain for the self-employed bus owners of the old system the best compensation package possible and would have loved to extend its knowledge and expertise to assist the new system to develop a service that meets the best interests of commuters and business operators in the various commercial centres spread throughout Malta.

Unfortunately the consultation did not work well. The fault, if we are really honest, is of all of us. We all knew that the big change was coming but most of us never bothered. We at GRTU raised a long list of issues from various districts based on consultations we held independently of Government. We could only act on the issues that were raised with us. The vast majority however did not bother. Even Local Councils failed to give this important issue the top priority it should have been given. There were mayors who only looked at the disk showing how the new public transport system was going to affect their locality only when the new system started and complaints started coming in.  Whatever the process when the system started, the failures of lack of proper consultations began to surface. Many of these issues have now been dealt with in the second phase of the bus reform announced as of 11/09. The system is still not perfect. In addition to the many great advantages of the new system when compared the horrible old system the whole schedule now is much better. It is still not perfect and we do not believe it will be perfected in the absence of at least one full year experience. But let us all be honest. We have now a system of busing that makes little Malta proud. New buses that are air-conditioned and of top class quality and no comparison to the old bone shakes of only a year ago, for most people who travel and are used to the efficient electronically supported systems in all of Europe the new buses make us proud.

The system adopted and the new time-tables are nothing different from those that British, French, German, Dutch, Italian and Swiss tourists are used to in their own countries. That is why tourists do not join in the organised anti-Arriva frenzy that some people and organisations have taken on board just to say something. GRTU is not in this clique. We have no political agenda to push forward. We are not anti-Arriva or anti anything. We make our views felt and get results because our system is very clear: we hear the complaints, we negotiate and present our views to the authorities and make proposals and insist on solutions. If they do not listen to us or act funny with us we go public and have no mercy towards anyone.

On Busing we made our criticism, we made our proposals based on what our members tell us and we got results. There is more to be done. But GRTU will not act stupid and go out critisising and damning what is an excellent investment backed by a tremendous endeavoUr to get things done right. We are not part of any orchestrated campaign to keep saying things are wrong when they are not. We hold surveys and we see with our own eyes. Things have improved substantially. Public transport today is of much higher quality both in equipment and manpower and service, there is still ground for improvements and we continue to strive to help Arriva give us an even better service. We must however be honest and we will refrain from looking stupid like some others are doing by simply denying which is an obvious tactic to look pretty. What we see and practice is a public transport system that improves by the week and can only get better.

The discussion on Budget 2012 has now started. The Pre-Budget outlining Governments intentions have been published in August and all those genuinely interested in seeing that our country gets the best of whatever resources are available to our elected Government within the framework of the current world and European economic scenario, have studied this document and drafted their recommendations.

Many alas as usual stayed put. They will only come out when someone pulls the string and orders them to act. GRTU as usual addressed its members in the various sections of businesses and enterprises and drew its own pack of proposals. GRTU through the active participation of its Director General in the discussions at European level is aware of the framework in which the Maltese authorities have to work in view of the new budgetary surveillance mechanism imposed on EU Member States following the worst economic crisis that hit Europe and more specifically the Eurozone. GRTU is also well versed in economic affairs and sufficiently knowledgeable on their impact of investment by small enterprises within the limited small Maltese economy. On the basis of our specific expertise GRTU came out with a number of conclusions and these have already been presented to Government. The first important opportunity was this week's MCESD meeting where representatives of workers` trade unions and leaders of enterprise presented their first reactions to the pre-budget document to the Minister of Finance who by the end of October must present his national financial package to the nation.

In his address to MCESD Vince Farrugia Director General of GRTU Malta Chamber of SMEs declared that GRTU wants to see a Budget that is strong on capital investment. He said that the economic analysis of the years since 2008 show that Government failed to continue to strengthen it's capital budget to match the shortfall gross capital formation suffered by the private sector as demand was driven down by the recession. Vince Farrugia said that it was terribly wrong for Government to have allowed that gross fixed capital formation in 2008 fall by 25.5% and in 2009 suffer another drop of 18.6% without having this matched by increased public capital investment. Indeed as capital investment began again to grow in 2010 by an increase of 10% and another increase that should be in the region of 11% by end 2011 the overall employment situation improved. Government is now projecting capital formations to grow only by an additional 3% in 2012. The schemes that have been put into action by Government through Malta Enterprise and other Government authorities like the Malta Resources Authority and the Malta Tourism Authority have helped to generate this growth but much more needs to be done.

Many of our enterprises in all sectors are aging and overall we have a shortage of employment so we need to invest more, and with urgency, in new technologies and new systems. This applies both to the public and to the private sector. We cannot compete in a new post recession Europe unless we change and re-invest. This is the time when we have to invent in new incentives to cause the financial institutions to give greater and wider access to finance to enterprises who want to invest and renovate. In addition, Government must be willing not only to invest in new public sector infrastructural projects that help renovate and modernise Malta but must also be willing to help enterprise and support the financial institutions by producing an extended loan guarantee scheme to cause more and more enterprises to invest. The loan guarantee scheme has been the most successful scheme ever introduced to support small and medium enterprises. There are so many enterprises that want to expand and change but cash flow in a period of recession and the immediate post recession period are scarce and opportunities are lost because the finance is absent. Now is the time for Government to be bold and plan for a strong revival in capital investment. "This is the main message of GRTU for Budget 2012" Vince Farrugia emphasised. There is much to be done and GRTU will be presenting details of its proposals in the coming few weeks. The message of Government should be very clear: money for increases in current expenditure is simply not available. Money for investment is available. The deficit will fall because cuts will be implemented so waste is diminished and better use of public moneys are made but the emphasis is on new capital formation. New incentives for the private sector and new forms of financing for large new public sector infrastructural projects is what makes Malta more competitive.

"Government should not face any problems with the new corrective measures demanded by the EU in their drive to cut on Member States budget deficits if the strategy is one based on investment in new capital formation that enables Malta's GDP to grow in real terms and sustain Malta's problems with economic imbalances." Vince Farrugia stressed. The multiplier effect of tax reduction and expenditure reduction is limited but in Malta capital investment has a multiplier of at least three to five times that of cuts in taxation like VAT. "We need to go for growth. The budget deficit ratio to GDP will fall the higher the growth rate of our GDP", concluded Vince Farrugia. "so lets go for growth, that's what our people urge you to do".

The Scheme announced by Minister Tonio Fenech  to help the owners of property who own the thousands of empty apartments that remain unsold and  others  believing that productive investment as compared to speculative property dealings as a much faster road to really big money is not bad in itself. It does however speak very badly about the principles that rule this Government. 

There is something very very wrong when a Government is so ready to side with hoarders of property and speculators against the better interests of the rest of the community.  Over the last years again and again this Government has exhibited an unreasonable long love-affair with property speculators. Many erstwhile staunch supporters of this Government detest this deeply and deeply.  Most small business owners fall precisely in this category. They never ask Government for anything. And they never get anything anyway except additional burdens.

First there were the incredible rounds of amnesties to absolve the frauds of those who were quick to move their funds illegally to foreign money markets or to hide them in Malta itself irrespective of the laws being broken. The law proved over and over again there was a law for the small man and another, much different, for the speculator who evaded tax in millions of lira. Government was quick to issue amnesties and was happy to see the flows back in circulation, official money laundering really, without even the slightest direction as to where and in what these flows of moneys could go. GRTU then also was brought in on the ticket to give support even though many in the organisation objected most strongly. The Director General of GRTU Vince Farrugia then insisted strongly with Government to cause a diversion of these funds to socially and economically desirable investments through the creation of appropriate Bonds so the millions laundered through the amnesties would not flood the property market. Government was however only keen to prop its financing by the addition of the small fines imposed on those who grossly enjoyed the amnesties. Fiscal frauds are wrong in principle but at least an effort should have been made to obtain investments with this laundered dirty money from which the community could benefit. Instead the laundered moneys where given a free rein to compete with clean money earned by the tax abiding honest investor. These moneys were moneys that were driven out of the Maltese economy when the Maltese economy badly needed these millions to create the new jobs, but the new jobs were created through the work and tax payments of those who did not evade and did not breach any exchange control rules. The vast majority of entrepreneurs worked and paid their taxes and invested in property, which was theirs after tax.

When the new flows of money rushed in, a total close to one billion euro representing a total gross tax evasion of more than three hundred million euro, what happened was that the price of property shot up beyond whatever any small operator could afford. The worst victims were the young couples and first time home buyers and families who wished to buy their larger home for the family got bigger. These honest people through Governments rushed amnesties now had to break their backs to meet the new hefty prices that property owners were now demanding. Many small contractors in the construction industry enjoyed the new building boom and Government appeared happy to see an artificial growth in the GDP. Any economist worth his salt knew however that this was short-lived and it represented very bad economics. The Banks then were enormous and so unjust. The new laundered money owners where the lords. Our banks were more interested to finance the new property development and most bankers began to see small entrepreneurs as a nuisance. They were interested in the hundreds of millions not in the tens of thousands demanded by the self-employed. The distortion that was registered in the Maltese economy is still visible for all to see. Like all property booms before however the amnesty funds generated property boom soon came to an end.

Unfortunately the worst recession that hit the industrialised world in 60 years hit us also as the world recession hit our shores. Our enterprises bleeding already from the reluctance of banks to consider them as a priority in the boom years now had to face the recession with plants and system that were not smart enough to meet the new threats and challenges. It did not matter too much to government. It took government three years to listen to the cries of GRTU to provide a sound financing package to help small businesses invest and grow. The Micro Invest scheme did help but only marginally. The Microcredit scheme came in two years too late and it had to be the Bank of Valletta to save the Government as Government actually put out nothing to really relieve small business owners of the credit famine that faced them. Malta Enterprise produced through EU Funding a number of interesting schemes and so did ETC. When you however consider the hundreds of small firms who benefitted as a ratio of the total number of small business in Malta, the total is really insignificant. That is why among the large community of self-employed and small business owners this Government is so unpopular. These are the people who suffered the brunt of the increased bureaucracy and arrogance of bureaucrats as the whole lot of the acquis communautaire was imposed on small Maltese enterprises and in return they practically got nothing. They always sweated on their own and their valiant work for the politician in power is only a statistic to boast with as elections get closer.

It is though not the same story when it comes to property speculators who make millions even if they evade as many taxes as they can possibly manage. Money begets money and money opens roads. For the first time in many years young couples and small operators were reaching out to buy properties that they could somehow afford as the pressure by the banks on many speculators who owned the properties unsold and heavily burdened with bank loans forced these speculators to put out the properties on the markets at prices that families and small businesses could afford. The market was slowly moving to find its true base as their demand for the previous high prices simply did not exist.  Many Maltese home buyers where till yesterday breathing a fresher air. They were also betting that as the pressure grew on the speculators to down price the hoard of properties they owned that prices become even more affordable. Many really believed that this government was clever enough to actually plan a property purchasing push by families as prices continue to tumble. Many self-employed were already seeing that the demand for their services as new house-owners searched for finishers and furnishings was on the increase. But that's not how those who decide for us in Government think. They somehow thought of the speculator first not the whole community.

There is a glut of property on the market not just in Malta but also in most other countries competing for foreign buyers. Speculators who invested in properties in Malta hoping to make a quick return by selling to foreigners believe that the foreign buyer is there and that foreign sales are the safety valve to hive off the more expensive properties. Government now came forward with a scheme that is not bad in itself but the aim is clear: Government wants to halt the slide in property prices and is helping speculators to keep the price of property from falling any further. One cannot talk of two separate markets, one for foreigners and one for Maltese, the market is one. Government knows this very well. They have the statistics and they made their studies carefully. The political decision has been taken: Government is choosing the speculator for the young couple, the family who seeks a larger home, and the small investor who wants to buy property to expand his business. Government Ministers believe they can interfere in the property market without imposing a socially unjust feedback. But it is not like this. It is wrong economics and it's socially unjust. Government acted wrongly when they introduced tax amnesties without seriously channelling the  laundered moneys that flowed back in the Maltese economy. Now again it has succumbed to the speculators. The question we seriously ask is simply: What's so wrong with this Government? And with the Opposition too as they pressed harder to make the speculators happy. It's the little man that never has any friends. This is the Political Power of property Speculators.

Government would have been wise and promote a policy that made social and economic sense if they launched a wide ranging scheme that gave tax advantages to Maltese young couples, families and small enterprise owners to buy the empty properties. There are enough tax advantages to foreigners in discrimination against tax paying Maltese citizens. It is high time that tax advantages are given to the Maltese. It is a shame that some business community representatives continue to promote further tax advantage to foreigners rather than to Maltese taxpayers.  The speculators friendly tax advantages to foreigners that Minister Tonio Fenech and the Cabinet of Ministers approved are aimed at rich Russians, Chinese, Iranians, Arabs and Africans. The five hundred million Europeans members of the EU do not need and cannot be tax advantaged. EU citizens will only benefit if the long list of tax obstacles still hampering free movement of citizens across EU borders are removed. That is what GRTU through its representative at EESC has strongly advocated (http://eescopinions.eesc.europa.eu/eescopiniondocument.aspx?language=en&docnr=1169&year=2011). This property speculator friendly measure is anti-Maltese and anti-European. It smells.

Invitation to participate in the next managerial training programmes in Japan funded by the European Commission

For EU managers working in an EU company

"DISTRIBUTION & BUSINESS PRACTICES IN JAPAN"

The programme enables participants to understand the Japanese distribution system and provides practical tools useful for building an effective marketing strategy for the Japanese / Asian markets. "DBP 2012" is composed of:

4 company visits to manufacturers, wholesalers, department stores etc.

"HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING PROGRAMME – JAPAN INDUSTRY INSIGHT"

The programme provides an in-depth view of Japanese industrial structure and business practices. "HRTP 2012" is composed of:

• Orientation session
• Japanese language and culture courses
• Lectures
• Joint seminar with Japanese business people
• Field trips (Sogo Shosha and Regional trip)
• Individual company visits 4/5-week training dates: 14/05/2012 – 08/06/2012 or 15/06/2012 (5th week is optional)

Application deadline: 16/02/2012

More information on: http://oanm59.com/qubjvwdihn1t0w4ssq/index3.html

Whether it is displayed on everyday items such as mobile phones, gas appliances and toys, or on medical and other specialised equipment, the "CE" marking is widely known throughout Europe.

In use since 1993, the marking is a key indicator of a product's compliance with EU legislation and enables the free movement of products that comply with legislation. By affixing the CE marking on a product, a manufacturer declares , on his own responsibility, conformity with all of the legal requirements to achieve CE marking. The marking applies to a wide range of products sold within the European Economic Area (EEA), meaning the 27 EU Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.

What the CE marking does is provide an indication that products carrying the marking comply with legislation applicable to them. It also helps manufacturers, distributors and importers to do business on a level playing field. It does not mean that a product was made in the EU or necessarily has been tested by a government agency. And it does not apply to all products sold within the EEA.

The system works this way: before a product can be sold within the EEA, the manufacturer must find out whether it is covered by any EU legislation providing for CE marking. The manufacturer must conduct checks according to the provisions of the relevant legislation to ensure the product complies with the legislative requirements. For example, children's toys are tested for cancer-causing chemicals, while machinery is tested to ensure operators are not physically imperilled. Following a successful check, the manufacturer affixes the CE marking on the product. Products not covered by legislation providing for CE marking may not carry the marking but still have to be checked according to the provisions of the legislation applying to them.

For products with a lower impact on health and safety and with a simple design, the manufacturer does the checking himself. However, if the product carries a higher level of potential risk – such as medical devices and gas-burning appliances – independent checking must be done by an authorised third party. In each case, the manufacturer conducts risk assessments and drafts technical documentation for the product.

Products from third countries that fall within the scope of legislation providing for CE marking and which will be sold within the EEA must also bear the CE marking. While manufacturers are responsible for ensuring product compliance and affixing the CE marking, importers and distributors also play an important role in making sure that only products which comply with the legislation and bear the CE marking are placed on the market. Not only does this help to reinforce the EU's health and safety protection requirements, it also supports fair competition with all players being held accountable to the same rules.

When goods are produced in third countries and the manufacturer is not represented in the EEA, importers must make sure that the products they place on the market comply with the applicable requirements and do not present a risk to the European public. The importer has to verify that the manufacturer outside the EU has taken the necessary steps and that the documentation is available upon request.

Further along the supply chain, distributors play an important role in ensuring that only compliant products are on the market. The distributor must also have a basic knowledge of the legal requirements – including which products must bear the CE marking and the accompanying documentation – and should be able to identify products that are clearly not in compliance.

Given the significance of CE marking, it is important that the system is backed up by credible and consistent enforcement. Therefore, EU member states have their own "market surveillance authorities" that can check and test manufacturers', distributors' and importers' products. If a product fails to comply with EU legislation or in case of misuse of CE marking, measures are taken. These may include recalling and destroying of a product. Responsible parties can be fined and, in grievous cases, imprisoned. In minor cases, violators can be given a second chance to comply with EU legislation.

Taken together, the CE marking system provides all stakeholders with means to promote the marketing of safe products within the European market.

For more information about CE marking, the products falling into the scope of legislation providing for CE marking, guidance for consumers and instructions for manufacturers, importers and distributors, please refer to the European Commission's Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry's CE marking website, at: http://ec.europa.eu/cemarking.

The Malta-EU Steering and Action Committee (MEUSAC), together with the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA), will be organising a seminar on Malta's actions in the fields of waste and noise management. This seminar will focus on:

Malta's draft plan for the implementation of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive (Directive 2002/96/EC). This Directive address the environmental impacts of WEEE and encourages its separate collection, subsequent treatment, reuse, recovery, recycling and environmentally sound disposal. The WEEE Directive affects producers, distributors, consumers and those involved in the recycling of electrical and electronic equipment, and encompasses everything from electronic games, calculators, toasters and kettles to audio equipment, fridges, washing machines, commercial and industrial equipment.

Malta's Noise Action Plan which sets out the way forward regarding the implementation of Directive 2002/49/EC relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise. This plan aims at preserving environmental noise quality where it is good, and preventing and reducing environmental noise where necessary and particularly where exposure levels can induce effects on human health.

Date: Tuesday, 13th September 2011

Time: 09.30hrs

Venue: The Grand Hall, Grand Hotel, Mgarr

This third seminar will tackle the issue of research and innovation within ‘Europe 2020'. The strategy, in driving innovation in products, services, business and social processes and models, considers innovation as the best means of successfully tackling major societal challenges, such as climate change, energy and resource scarcity, health and ageing.  

The seminar will include presentations on the targets set within ‘Europe 2020' with respect to investment in research and innovation. There will also be workshops to gather views and ideas on how Malta can best work to maximise opportunities which investment in research and innovation bring. All those players involved in areas related to industry, academia, and other activities related to research and innovation are invited to attend the seminar, and to contribute actively in identifying Malta's main challenges and the best way to tackle them.

Those intending to attend the seminar are requested to register by Friday, September 9 by sending an email on , indicating the first and second preferences of the workshops to be attended. Proceedings during the seminar will be held in Maltese. Complimentary parking will be available.

Date: 14th September 2011

Venue: The Palace Hotel, Sliema

GRTU has been notified by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs that, following the mission to Tripoli by the special adviser to the United Nations Secretary General (UNSG), Mr. Ian Martin, the UNSG Ban Ki-Moon is proposing the establishment of a United Nations Support Mission to Libya (UNSMIL). 

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is expecting that this will in part necessitate the resort to Maltese suppliers of goods and services for outsourcing to Libya.

Against this background, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been informed that the United Nations and its agencies have a special procurement procedure whereby potential suppliers of goods and services to the UN and its agencies MUST first be pre-registered with the United Nations Procurement Procedure in order to be eligible for such tendering.  All necessary information can be found on the following website:  http://www.un.org/Depts/ptd/

The Construction Products Directive (89/106/EEC) will be replaced by the new Construction Products Regulation, as implemented by the draft legal notice, as from the 1^st July 2013.

The new Regulation (305/2011/EU) lays down conditions for the placing or making available on the market of construction products by establishing harmonised rules on how to express the performance of construction products in relation to their essential characteristics and on the use of CE marking on those products.

Who would be interested

Manufacturers, importers, distributors and sellers of construction products.

What will be affected

Regulation (EU) No. 305/2011 applies to any product or kit which is produced and placed on the market for incorporation in a permanent manner in buildings or civil engineering works or parts thereof and the performance of which has an effect on the performance of the building or civil engineering works with respect to the basic work requirements of the building or civil engineering works.

Dates

Feedback to be received by the 23rd September 2011.

Contacts

Comments to be sent to the Regulatory Affairs Directorate, Technical Regulations Division, Malta Competition and Consumer Affairs Authority by e-mail –