Category: Archive – 2012

Against the background of weaker
economic activity across the globe, the July edition of the Quarterly Report on
the Euro Area examines recent trade developments at the global, EU and Member
State level in detail. Overall, world trade activity has recovered reasonably
well following the collapse of global trade in 2009. Spurred by strong demand
in emerging market economies, it now seems to be approaching its long-term
growth trend but will probably expand at lower rates than in the boom years of
the previous decade.

At the euro area level, the crisis does
not seem to have aggravated the downward trend in global export market shares
already observed since before the crisis, but seems to have affected the
geographical and product specialisation of its exports. Looking ahead,
sustained import demand from non-EU emerging markets and a rebound of import
demand in new EU Member States should contribute to support euro area exports
in the coming years. Due to the impact of the financial crises and increased
competitive pressures from emerging market suppliers, the euro area is,
however, facing specific challenges in some export sectors, particularly in
machinery and transport equipment.

At the euro area Member State level,
the report shows that the import content of exports is high and rising,
particularly in smaller Member States, a trend which has important implications
for ongoing current account rebalancing processes.

The strength of export performance in
recent years appears to have been mainly driven by changes in geographical and
product market shares, rather than by countries' initial geographical and
sectoralspecialisation. Export performance appears to be only partly related to
price competitiveness, which reaffirms the need to for policy measures –
including at the euro area level – to improve non-price competitiveness,
including through higher competition in the services sector, export promotion
programmes and the promotion of R&D and skills.

The Cosmetic Products Notification
Portal (CPNP) is the online notification system on cosmetic products placed or
made available on the EU market.

This is of critical importance for
bodies established by EU Member States for the purposes of medical treatment of
cases of poisoning and to national authorities for better market surveillance.
The CPNP is accessible as from last January to Competent Authorities, European
Poison Centres and cosmetic products responsible persons as well as
distributors of cosmetic products.

A guide on the use of this facility can
be accessed on:
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/sectors/cosmetics/cpnp/index_en.htm

Opportunity to form part of the Trade
and Investment Promotion Delegation to China (Shanghai) and Hong Kong between
the 13 and 21 October 2012. China – China is one of the biggest countries
in the world with an area of about 9.6 million km² and a population of more
than 1.343 billion (as at July 21) which accounts for 23% of the world's
population. It is also the great economic success story of the past 30 years.

Hong Kong

Hong Kong became the Special
Administrative Region (SAR) of the People's Republic of China in July 1997. It
has a total area of 1014 sq km and had a population of circa 7.15million (as at
July 2011).  Hong Kong has a free market economy and is highly dependent
on international trade and finance. With such an open economy, the global
economic slowdown also affected Hong Kong, although increasing integration with
China through trade, tourism and finance helped it to make an initial recovery
more quickly. Hong Kong's Economy expanded by 5% during 2011 and is considered
as the world's most service oriented economy with the services sectors
accounting for more than 90% of the GDP. 

Promising areas of investment, trade
and technology commercialisation with both China and Hong Kong include:
Financial and Professional Services, ICT, Environment & Renewable Energy,
Education & Training, Food & Beverages, Travel& Tourism.

Match making meetings for participants
will be organised.  Closing date for
applications is Friday 24 August 2012. Contact Abigail Mamo at GRTU is
interested

A special
Eurobarometer was published providing some useful insights on Europeans
Attitudes. More than 26 500 European citizens aged 15 and above were
interviewed in all 27 EU MS.

More than 90% of EU citizens find quality and price an
important factor when buying food, and more important than origin (71%) and
brand (47%) – indeed they were deemed "very important" by 65%
(quality) and 54% (price)

Quality labels are important for two-thirds of respondents,
and there is an improvement in the recognition of the different EU quality
logos: 24% of those asked recognise the EU organic logo, less than 2 years
after it was launched.

On food security, three-quarters of EU citizens
expressed concern at the challenge of feeding the world's population, but less
than 60% are concerned about the ability of the EU and Member states to meet
the food needs of their populations.

Most EU citizens regard agriculture as making a
positive contribution to preserve rural areas. This is consistent across most
Member States and socio-demographic groups. There is a broad consensus that
agriculture plays a beneficial role.

Key findings

Food security: Some 56% of respondents
are not preoccupied by the level of food production in their country and 57%
are not preoccupied by this at EU level as a whole. On the other hand, 76% of
respondents are preoccupied by the level of food production in the world.
Following on from those results, 84% of people agree that the EU should help
other countries to increase their food production.

Some 81% agree that the EU should
increase its own food production to depend less on imports, and 77% agree that
EU should produce more to satisfy the needs of its own citizens, as well as the
demand from outside the EU.

Food quality: For 96% of respondents
food quality is a factor when deciding to buy or not to buy products – it comes
even before price, which is cited by 91% of respondents. The origin of the
product is less crucial, but still important to 71% of respondents. By contrast
the brand is not considered important by 50% of respondents, as opposed to the
47% of those who consider it important. Quality labels are important to 67% of
respondents.

Only a minority of EU citizens
recognise logos of EU food quality assurance schemes: 36% of EU citizens are
aware of the non-EU Fairtrade logo, 24% are aware of the EU's Organic farming
logo and only a small minority are aware of logos symbolising the three
elements of the EU's Protected Geographical Status scheme (PDI,PDO, TSG).

Agriculture and the countryside: 81% of
respondents consider that agriculture is beneficial for the environment, 86%
agree that it contributes to the beauty of the countryside and 89% believe that
agriculture helps to protect rural areas.

The full report can be found here:
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/survey/index_en.htm

On the 11 July 2012 the Commission put
forward a proposal for a directive on collective rights management and
multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online uses. The objective of the proposal is to put
in place a better legal framework for the collective management of rights that
are administered by collecting societies on behalf of rightholders such as
authors, performers, producers etc.

The specific objectives of the proposal
are to:

improve the way all collecting societies are managed by
establishing common governance, transparency and financial management
standards;

set minimum standards for the multi-territorial
licensing by authors' collecting societies of rights in musical works for the
provision of online services; and

to create conditions that can expand the legal offer of
online music

In order that Malta may effectively
contribute to discussions on this proposal at the EU Council it is essential
that the views of all national stakeholders in this area are taken on board.
You are therefore kindly requested to review this Directive and provide GRTU
with feedback.

NB.  The full impact assessment is
available on the EU website at

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/management/index_en.htm

The European Commission is to simplify
the Europe-wide system of alerts to food health problems, but has stopped short
of proposing to centralise control of the alerts. Changes to the Rapid Alert System for
Food and Feed (RASFF) were almost inevitable after an outbreak of E. Coli in
May-July 2011 which killed 55 people and made more than 4,000 people sick.

The
outbreak was at its worst in northern Germany in May, but there was also a
significant cluster of cases in June 2011 in south-west France.

The Commission published on Friday (20
July) a review of the food alerts system, taking into account the E. coli
outbreak and the lessons learned.

Germany's health authorities submitted
data to the RASFF that misidentified Spanish cucumbers as the source of the
outbreak. The Commission was later accused of being too slow to correct this
erroneous information. It was only after the disease had spread further that
the source was eventually identified as a specific shipment of seeds for bean
sprouts from Egypt in 2010.

The Commission administers the RASFF,
but it does not independently verify the data submitted by member states during
the early stages of a health scare. The data submitted by national authorities
is distributed through the network to all other member states. The false alert
meant that Spanish vegetable producers suffered heavy losses, as their markets
collapsed, which were estimated at €810 million in the first two weeks. The
farmers were later partially compensated from the EU budget with €227m.

Moving online

Shortly after the E. coli outbreak, the
Commission decided to convert the RASFF system to an all-digital platform. Set
up in 1979, most alerts are currently entered and relayed using email. The new
iRASFF platform will allow national authorities to enter information online,
which should provide more information, faster. Member states will switch over
to the new system gradually, though the precise dates have not yet been set.

The Commission is revising rules on
traceability so that tracing back the origin of contaminated or suspect foods
is faster and more efficient. The Commission is also working with the European
Food Safety Authority to improve controls in the cultivation of fruit and
vegetables to guard against non-animal pathogens. Specific rules on the
production of seeds and sprouts are being developed.

The Commission is to provide specific
training for major trading partners such as Egypt on investigating food-borne
outbreaks and on managing outbreaks.

Some critics had hoped the Commission
would take a more central role in the RASFF. Under existing rules the
Commission can assume special powers such as suspending sales of food and
setting up a crisis unit for an EU-wide response during emergency situations.
But these powers have never been used.

It was an EFSA taskforce that belatedly
identified the source of the contamination as coming from Egypt. But this work
was not undertaken at an EU level until after the outbreak had already peaked.

There will be tighter co-ordination of
RASFF with the EU's Early Warning and Response System, but a Commission
official said that it was best at the early stages of a crisis to leave the
responsibilities for gathering and disseminating data to member states. "We will
strengthen our operating procedure so there are more certainties for the data
entered into the system," he said. "But the responsibility remains with the
national authority, which has to put into the system reliable data."

Hairdresser's representatives made
history when recently the Social Partners in Brussels ratified the agreement on
health and safety of hairdressers. Monday 27^th August 2012 – 0830 – 1300  – Dolmen Resort Hotel-Qawra. Confirm
attendance with Carmen Borg on or 21232881by not later than
Monday 20th August.

To mark this event the Occupational
Health and Safety Authority in Malta, in conjunction and with the full support
of the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work and the European
Commission, is organizing a half day seminar on Health and Safety risks
associated with the Hairdressing sector.

Hairdressers are invited to attend
and participate in this seminar.  Attendances are being accepted at first
come first served, since the number of invites is limited to 100 participants.
 

A copy of the Framework Agreement
is available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=7697&langId=en

During a public seminar organized by
MIEMA on the 15^th June, GRTU drew the attention of MEPA's
representatives at the seminar together with MRA and Enemalta re the issue
reported in certain media that PV's are ruining Malta's skyline. Noel Gauci
from the renewable energy section of GRTU, recommended that a joint committee
is set up to issue guidelines for this growing sector to leave the desired
results.

It is true that some installations are not up to standard, and it is
GRTU's belief that installers should not accept to do installations that
eventually result in an eyesore. Who brings up the excuse that as a supplier's
responsibility stops at informing the customer is shortsighted and selfish as
these ‘ugly' installations only harm the sector for themselves and for their
fellow suppliers and leave the customer to face the music alone with MEPA.
Every installer has the moral responsibility of not biting the hand that feeds
him, thus we have to take care of the sector and learn from past mistakes not
to repeat them.

On the other hand GRTU will never agree
with any form of application which requires some form of processing with MEPA
prior installing a PV system. This would heavily increase bureaucracy,
something which is already not lacking in the sector, and will lengthen the
processing period for installations, which would be a  killer due to
timeframes imposed by the schemes. If such a measure is included, the sector
will be greatly harmed and the hard work done by many stakeholders such as
MFEI, MRRA, PPCD, MRA, Enemalta and GRTU will be wasted, resulting in a great
loss of opportunity for our families and for our nation as a whole.

However GRTU does not stop at objecting
to measures, it also makes proposals, and our proposal is that the committee is
formed without delay, suppliers are duly informed by the committee what the
parameters are and then they will be held responsible if an installation is not
done within those parameters. However it would not be fair for any authority to
try to grill an installer or client on installations before these parameters
are issued and suppliers are duly informed. One cannot expect people to abide
by a law that does not even exist.

GRTU also condemns isolating the PV
industry and blaming it for negative visual impact. One has to see the whole
picture.

If we look around us, we see pylons and
poles everywhere. So why is Enemalta asking customers to pay for their culvert
in newly built up areas if they want to avoid poles? The price of making
culverts is very similar to installing poles, even less if the road is being
newly done, and they have the added benefit of protecting the cables thus
reducing in maintenance and dangers for everyone.

How about reducing emissions from our
power stations? If there is an eyesore in the picturesque Marsaxlokk village which
we see in every postcard (apart from the power station itself) this is
definitely the smoke coming out of the several chimneys and covering sometimes
the whole area, and at other times Marsascala area up to Valletta and Sliema.
What are we waiting for to start switching machines one by one to gas?

How about better building regulations
and avoiding the rather squarish and ultra-simplistic buildings being
‘designed' by our architects and developers today.

So let us not isolate one important and
beneficial sector when we can tackle much more serious problems and allow such
a crucial industry that is creating jobs, revenue for the government through
VAT, reduction of unemployment and helping avoid hefty fines for not reaching
our emissions targets, to work.

Facts always speak louder than words. Packaging Compliance
Schemes have been waiting for amendments to the principal regulations (Legal
Notice 277 of 206) for over seven months now. The amendments were published for
public consultation early in June.Government, through the Ministry for Tourism  Culture and the Environment (MTEC), set
procedures in motion so that these amendments actually become law and had to be
published on the Government Gazette on 17th July 2012.

Government Authorities and Ministries seem not to care at all
as long as a service is being rendered to the community, at no cost to
Government. The laissez-faire attitude by GovernmentAuthorities and departments
will not change unless they feel the brunt of forking funds.

As an Authorised Packaging Waste Compliance Scheme, we are
committed to provide a service to 270,000 residents and this does not come
cheap. As a Scheme we have found loopholes in the principal regulations that
drive us to the gutter. These loopholes have already been outlined to
Government late last year but our call for action continues to fall on deaf
ears.

The Scheme has dedicated members, who fork out funds
financially on a quarterly or yearly basis in order for us to be able to
provide services within the community. Whilst we do our utmost, Government,
through MEPA, and mostly MTCE, does its best to leave to ruin what has been
built over the last three to four years.

It is ridiculous to note that since January 2012, no
penalties for infringement to Legal Notice 277 of 2006 have been issued. We are
told that the enforcement of this legislation, which was being done well by the
Policy and Compliance Unit, has been forwarded to the Enforcement Directorate.
Since that happened what was built last year went into limbo. Schemes are not
able to take on new members because there is no enforcement at all. Or is this
just because an election is near?

If that is the case, it is well that MEPA takes due note that
packaging waste has no colours, and the environment and its problems cannot
wait until an election is held and maybe then we set the ball rolling.

To add insult to injury MEPA allows producers of packaging
waste who sell directly to consumers to self-comply with the legislation and
Green MT has to collect their packaging from households against no kind of fee,
because the producer who generates this packaging waste does not pay a cent to
anyone.

But the buck stops here! If these amendments are not issued
by end July 2012 it will be Government that will foot the bill for the
collection of grey bag and collection from Bring in Sites and their upkeep. The
choice is an easy one and Local Councils will not bear the brunt. After all
Government had always promised them that it will have to take on this
responsibility if a Scheme or Schemes falter.

Now, it is testing time, facts not words!