Category: Archive – 2012

Il-GRTU izzomm ill-Malta Enterprise responsabbli tal-hsara lil min hu bla htija – Il-GRTU – Kamra Maltija ghan-Negozji Zghar u Medji llum laqqghet lill-beneficcjarji u lill-fornituri li applikaw biex jibbenefikaw taht xi wahda mill-iskemi mhaddma mill-Malta Enterprise taht il-fondi Ewropej li jaghmlu parti mill-European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

Dawn il-fondi qed jithaddmu biex jghinu lill-intraprizi Maltin jinstallaw sistemi ta' panelli fotovoltaici.

Wara verifikazzjoni interna permezz tal-Awdituri interni imqabbda mill-Malta Enterprise, il-Malta Enterprise iddecidiet li tissospendi l-iskema ta' assistenza u li hemm bizzejjed evidenza biex tqabbad lill-Pulizija tinvestiga aktar kazi ta' suspett ta' dikjarazzjonijiet foloz bil-ghan li applikanti li jgawdu minn assistenza li taghha ma jkunux gustifikati.

Il-GRTU sa mill-bidu nett ta' dan oggezzjonat li l-applikanti kollha taht l-erba' skemi s'issa mhaddma mill-Malta Enterprise, gew identifikati qishom suspetti ta' attivita' illicita' u gew kollha suggettati li jkunu msejjha ghall-interogazzjoni mill-Pulizija meta setgha l-ewwel gie stabbilit internament mill-Malta Enterprise, min prima facia setgha kien hati u mhux gara li, gie imcappas kulhadd. Ir-Rizultat hu li s-sidien ta' intraprizi Maltin qed jigu msejha id-Depot tal-Pulizija sahansitra il-Hadd biex ikunu investigati qishom kriminali. Il-GRTU oggezzjonat ukoll bil-kbir li twaqqfu l-iskemi kollha u t-tielet li l-hlasijiet lil intraprizi twaqqfu meta l-Malta Enterprise bhala l-promottur taht il-Ligi tal-intrapriza Maltija taf li l-waqfien tal-hlasijiet fuq xoghol diga' ordnat u fuq materjali diga' stokkjati u mhallsa, se jpoggu hafna ditti f'diffikultajiet finanzjarji meta m'hemmx hjiel li dawn huma hatja ta' xi att illecitu.

Il-GRTU tistenna li aktar carezza u gustizzja tithaddem f'dan il-kaz ghax jidher li l-affarijiet qed isiru bl-ghaggla irrispettivament mill-hsara li qed issir lill-intraprizi li mxew b'mod korrett.

Mil-Laqgha tal-lum fil-GRTU harget car li l-bicca l-kbira tal-intraprizi applikanti taht l-erba' skemi diga' baghtew bizejjed fid-dewmien inspjegabbli biex isiru l-hlasijiet dovuti u mhux spjegabbli li min m'hemm xejn kontrih ghandu issa jbati aktar bl-iskuza ta' din l-investigazzjoni.

Il-GRTU f'isem il-membri applikanti tal-erba' skemi l-ewwel nett qed titlob li id-dewmien minhabba investigazzjonijiet ghandu jigi rifless f'estenzzjoni tad-data sa meta ghandhom jitlestew l-installazzjonijiet. Il-GRTU qed taghmilha cara u pubblika li f'isem l-applikanti zzomm lill-Malta Enterprise responsabbli tal-hsara kummercjali, ta' kull dewmien u ta' kull implikazzjoni ingusta ta' xi htija li taghha ma jkunux responsabbli.

 

State Aid: Commission adopts rules on national support for industry electricity costs in context of the EU Emission Trading Scheme  – The European Commission has adopted a framework under which Member states may compensate some electro-intensive users, such as steel and aluminium producers, for part of the higher electricity costs expected to result from a change to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) as from 2013.

 

The rules ensure that national support measures are designed in a way that preserves the EU objective of decarbonising the European economy and maintains a level playing field among competitors in the internal market. The sectors deemed eligible for compensation include producers of aluminium, copper, fertilisers, steel, paper, cotton, chemicals and some plastics.

Commission Vice-President in charge of competition policy Joaquín Almunia said: "If production shifts from the EU to third countries with less environmental regulation , this could undermine our objective of a global reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. There may be such a risk in some sectors, given the expected impact of the ETS on electricity costs as from 2013. The rules adopted today allow Member States to address this issue while maintaining incentives to decarbonise production and consumption and minimising any distortions of competition."

The reform of the ETS agreed in 2009 and taking effect from 2013 onwards means that electricity bills for companies in the EU are expected to increase as a result of the stricter cap under the ETS post 2012. The Commission has therefore adopted a Communication setting out the criteria under which Member States may support some categories of users which are expected to be particularly affected by the ETS reform.

Based on official Eurostat data collected from Member States and input from public consultations, the Commission has identified a certain number of sectors that are deemed to be at a significant risk of carbon leakage. Carbon leakage means that global greenhouse gas emissions increase when companies in the EU shift production outside the EU because they cannot pass on the cost increases induced by the ETS to their customers without a significant loss of market share to third country competitors. The Commission has assessed in which sectors there existed a genuine risk of carbon leakage and consulted Member States and stakeholders. If the conditions set out in these new rules are met, aid to compensate for EU ETS allowance costs passed on to electricity prices in these sectors will be considered compatible with the internal market.

The new rules carefully balance several key objectives. They aim to mitigate the impact of indirect CO2 costs for the most vulnerable industries, thereby preventing carbon leakage which would undermine the effectiveness of the EU ETS. At the same time, the rules have been designed to preserve the price signals created by the EU ETS in order to promote a cost-effective decarbonisation of the economy. They are also designed to minimise competition distortions in the internal market by avoiding subsidy races within the EU at a time of economic uncertainty and budgetary discipline.

The rules allow subsidies of up to 85% of the increase faced by the most efficient companies in each sector from 2013 to 2015, a cap that will gradually fall to 75% in 2019-2020.

Moreover, the construction of new highly efficient power plants which will implement an environmentally safe capture and geological storage of CO2 (CCS-ready) by 2020 may receive support of up to 15% of the investment costs.

Background

In March 2007, the European Council adopted a climate and energy package, with the aim to combat climate change and increase the EU's energy security while strengthening its competitiveness. The ETS Directive as amended in 2009 is a central component of that policy. It lays down two binding targets to be achieved by 2020: first, a reduction of CO2 emissions by 20% from the emissions level in 1990 and, second, increasing the share of renewable energy sources in the EU to 20% of overall energy consumption over the same time span. At the same time the European Council established a (non-binding) target to increase energy efficiency by 20% by 2020.

The 20% reduction target remains valid, although the EU is committed to moving to a legally binding 30% reduction commitment depending on international action. The EU's objective is to reduce CO2 emissions by 80-95% by 2050.

The full text of the communication will be available at:

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/sectors/energy/legislation_en.html

The European Court has upheld the Commission's 2007 decision on MasterCard, ruling that the MIF set ‘a floor under the costs charged to merchants and thus constituted a restriction of price competition that was to their detriment.'

 

EuroCommerce, the European Retail Round Table (ERRT) and GRTU applaud this excellent ruling. EuroCommerce Director-General Christian Verschueren said, "We are delighted with this decision, which wholly vindicates retail's ten-year campaign against these anti-competitive fees. We now call on the Commission to follow this up with radical and decisive regulatory solutions to make payments in Europe truly competitive."

We commend the court on its unequivocal rulings on the economic basis of the multilateral interchange fee (MIF): these clearly show that the court upholds the Commission's view on the anti-competitive nature of the MIF. The retail sector has long argued that the MIF is an unseen and non-negotiable burden for merchants and the Commission's own figures show that card transactions cost EU merchants €25 billion per year.

Dennis Kredler, Director-General of the European Retail Round Table (ERRT) added, "This ruling is excellent news. We now need a robust methodology to regulate how the costs for payment card services are calculated and allocated. The Green Paper on mobile card and internet payments is an excellent opportunity to establish an obligation on card companies to offer a basic payment service."

What happens next?

The Court's judgment means that the MasterCard cross-border MIF is contrary to EU competition law and must be removed. We also trust that the national competition authorities will now follow the European Court's lead. However, a long-term business model must still be found, through regulatory measures already begun by the Commission Green Paper on Payments. We urge the Commission to tackle the business model issue head-on; solving the associated issues of cross-border acquiring, the honour all cards rule (HACR) and transparency would be simply not enough. We call on the Commission to implement the basic payment service model.

Basic payment service

The MIF burdens the retail sector with the excessive cost of bundled services from which the merchant does not benefit. We therefore advocate the stripping away of all these extra services and the creation, by regulation, of a mandatory basic payment service. This service, which should exist on each and every SEPA payment card, would offer consumers and merchants the facility to make a payment, which would carry a fee for the service but would not have a MIF. In short, we advocate the unbundling of the basic payment operation from all other additional services which may be offered by a payment scheme.

Background

In 1997, EuroCommerce lodged complaints with the European Commission against EuroPay (now part of MasterCard Incorporated) and Visa. Ten years later the European Commission issued a decision which confirmed that: 1) MasterCard's MIF, in effect, sets a minimum price that merchants must pay to their acquiring bank, and therefore infringes Article 101(1) of the Treaty of the European Union and 2) MasterCard failed to show that the conditions (in essence efficiency) of Article 101 (3), which give exemption from the Article 101 prohibition, were satisfied. In 2007, the Commission ruled that MasterCard's MIF was in breach of European competition law and ordered the card scheme to remove it. As a consequence, MasterCard set its cross-border MIF to zero in 2008, but appealed the Commission decision. The European Court has now rejected that appeal and upheld the Commission decision. MasterCard can still appeal to the higher court on a point of law.

Since this year is the last year for the 7^th Framework Programme you are encouraged to attend and understand how you can tap into EU funding for Research.

During the session we will have a brief overview of FP7 and a detailed outline of the 2013 Health Calls scheduled to be issued in July 2012. A European Commission Representative will also be present. A Maltese Evaluation Expert will also give us his perspective and a success story will be presented.

Send an email on  for further info.

Date: Friday 8th June 2012

Venue : Mater Dei Hospital

Time: 10:00am

Why did you become an entrepreneur? I was married to an entrepreneur. How have you come to choose your line of business? It is a family line of business

Where did you go on your last holiday?

Greece – I was born there so I like everything

What is your earliest memory?

2nd World War – when I was 3 years old

If you could chose to be someone famous who would you be and why?

I am happy as I am !

Fl-okkażjoni tat-tmien anniversarju mis-sħubija ta' Malta fl-Unjoni Ewropea, il-MEUSAC se jorganizza konferenza nazzjonali f'Għawdex dwar l-esperjenza ta' Għawdex bħala gżira-reġjun fl-Unjoni Ewropea matul dawn l-aħħar tmien snin.

Din il-konferenza se ssir nhar it-Tlieta, 12 ta' Ġunju 2012, fil-Grand Hotel, l-Imġarr, Għawdex.

Matul il-konferenza ser tingħata ħarsa dettaljata dwar kif Għawdex għamel użu mill-fondi tal-Unjoni Ewropea. Ikun hemm ukoll diskussjoni b'panel magħmul minn numru ta' esponenti minn diversi setturi Għawdxin. L-udjenza preżenti tkun mistiedna tagħti l-kontribut tagħha u tipparteċipa b'mod attiv.

Id-diskors tal-għeluq tal-konferenza ser isir mill-Prim Ministru ta' Malta, L-Onor. Lawrence Gonzi.

Kull min jixtieq jirreġistra, huwa ġentilment mitlub jibgħat email fuq  u fiha jinkludi l-isem u l-kunjom ta' kull min se jattendi, l-isem tal-organizazzjoni li qed tkun rappreżentata, kif ukoll numru tat-telefown, jew iċempel fuq 2200 3300 u jsaqsi għal Brian Pace.

GRTU has this week written to the Minister for education and the Minister responsible for land stating that GRTU has been made aware by its members that there are around 12 buildings designated to be utilised as schools, which due to a number of reasons are not functioning as such.

The private sectors is very much in need of such buildings and we do feel it is a pity they are being deprived of such an opportunity when these buildings are in reality available. The private sector would rent these buildings to be used as they were originally designed to be used, as schools.

GRTU stated that it is aware that some ‘school buildings' have been condemned and therefore are currently vacant. The private sector is willing to carry out the necessary investments so that these buildings can be restored and used once again as schools. We are unfortunately also aware that there are other ‘school buildings' which have been given as office space and in the evenings utilised for evening classes. Today at the same time the private sector is utilising buildings designated for office space as schools because they cannot find schools to rent.

GRTU believes this is an issue that should be taken seriously not only because it will maximise the utilisation of resources, but it will also generate extra income for the Government and it saves the private sector from buying virgin land to build a school.

On a general note GRTU believes closer cooperation with the private sector should be further explored. For instance there are a number of state schools that have a very low number of students, which would constitute a perfect example of a possible private-public partnership that would guarantee to the Government that the local children are catered for and the use of the building would be maximised.

GRTU asked for an opportunity to further discuss the topic.

GRTU has this week written to the Prime Minister to express its disappointment that following tests with heavy fuel oil (HFO) carried out on the new power station, and a picture of the smoke emitted was presented to him personally during the meeting with the GRTU National Executive Council at the PN headquarters, MEPA has since extended permits for such tests till June 2013.  

 

GRTU stated that recently, in the period during which tests were being carried out, restaurant owners and other GRTU members in Marsaxlokk reported that they were approached by customers apologizing for having to leave the table early as they could not stand the ‘heavy burning plastic stench'.  Similar reports of burning tar or plastic stench came also from Marsascala, Paola, Siggiewi and central Malta up to even Sliema.

The smell is heavily affecting business in the area, especially the restaurant community of Marsaxlokk.

GRTU believes such testing by MEPA is unnecessary and one does not need a British University to tell us the obvious and that the Marsaxlokk waterfront and other towns and villages are being intoxicated. Anyone can see and smell the yellowish cloud coming out of the 4 new chimneys when the plant is run on HFO.

GRTU officials have monitored the cloud recently as it followed the air currents and diffused. On that particular day, the Marsaxlokk Harbour saw its normally blue skies turn yellow. The cloud then proceeded to Birzebbugia and Hal Far and it could be witnessed going out at sea in a circle and landing back on land in an area ranging from the three cities up to Sliema. It then diffused on various localities up to central Malta such as Birkirkara, Siggiewi, Zurrieq, Qrendi, Mqabba, Gudja, Tarxien, Zebbug, Qormi, Marsa and then out to sea again.

The effects are therefore evident and the Maltese population and business should no longer be made to suffer the effects of HFO, not even for testing. The result is unbearable. You do not have to be an expert to realise HFO is in no way the way forward. There are other fuels that can be utilised which have a much lower impact and we should not keep holding back on using them. If Malta has already spent its money on a supply of HFO we have to sell it or find alternative uses for it. If one is naïve enough to look only at the financial aspect, it would still not be feasible to use HFO as it going to cost us more in human illnesses, loss of work and cures.

GRTU requested a reply, one which explains Government's sensible plans as to the fuel the Power Station is to be run on from now on.

GRTU has this week written to the Prime Minister following the fact that GRTU had always objected very strongly that in order to tackle the few identified faults so many more operators are made to suffer, at no fault of their own, when such important scheme are suddenly suspended. This has already happened not so long ago and the effects on the industry were devastating. The industry will not survive another wave of lost orders, idle workers and cash flow crises.

GRTU noted with desolation the suspension of the Malta Enterprise ERDF energy scheme where the installation of PV equipment on commercial and industrial property is mostly affected. The scheme was intended to aid companies install clean energy producing equipment, lowering their utility bills, and in turn aiding the government reach its renewable energy targets. The scheme generated around 300 projects, with a minimum direct effect on at least 600 companies between beneficiaries and suppliers. In the process hundreds of green jobs are created, and the savings done by the beneficiaries allow them to create more jobs.

The amounts of revenue for the Government in taxes, VAT, N.I. and reduction of un-employment benefits greatly outdo the 15% financed by the Maltese Government paid as grant. The scheme should also help the Government avoid hefty penalties or having to resort to buying green credits from other EU countries by the end of 2012 to counteract not reaching the renewable energy target of 2%, and also helps reduce emissions from our power-stations reducing illnesses and health related costs.

GRTU therefore believed this en-bloc suspension is anti-commercial, indiscriminate and will have an adverse effect on the country as a whole. It is counterproductive in the sense that while it safeguards a relatively small amount of cash, it compromises much larger amounts and benefits as described above. It also creates huge difficulties due to cash flow issues, as well as loss of confidence in government institutions. It will hit hard hundreds of firms at a difficult time, endangering all the government and private sector have painstakingly been working hard to avoid, loss of jobs.

GRTU insisted that following two detailed investigations carried out, one by ME's auditors and the other by independent auditors, to find out which companies were involved in wrongdoing, it is believed that given the suspension ME must have a list of ‘presumed guilty' suppliers, although this is legally not correct.

Likewise, ME should have a clear picture of which companies are ‘presumed innocent', and with such information at hand, ME should publish the list of the companies that are ‘presumed innocent' and revise the en-bloc suspension to a selective one, allowing ‘presumed innocent' companies to carry on business as usual. The published list should be continuously and timely updated as more investigations are carried out and more companies are declared innocent.

GRTU is all in favour of Government taking harsh action towards those proven guilty so that a repeat is avoided but the rest cannot be affected. It is not acceptable for all other beneficiaries to suffer, the Scheme must not be suspended.