The Times of Malta
The Maltese bishops feel that in the eyes of Europe and the world Malta is a divided nation.` They appealed to political parties to act in the national interest by reaching a consensus on the European Union issue.
`Normally were consenus is required and it is unobtainable for whatever reason, the status quo prevails.`
By implication, through exercising their democratic right to hold genuinely different views over the issue, the government and/or the opposition are acting against the national interest. This is unfair and untrue.
The bishops do not indicate on which side of the debate the consensus should fall. Normally were consensus is required and it is unobtainable for whatever reason, the status quo prevails.
So reaching consensus on a status quo, even if for a limited period of time until the whole matter can be reviewed in the light of unfolding circumstances, could indeed be a wise and practical solution.
But accusing anybody who holds a different point of view of harming the country`s interest or that the country could be harmed by the inability to achieve consensus is unnecessarily alarmist.
I am presently attending an international seminar on the reform of international institutions to give a human face to the globalisation process.` I am in company of several delegates coming from existing and prospective country members of the EU.
`I have yet to meet anyone who considers our vigorous debate on EU membership as harmful to the country`s interest.` Indeed most consider it healthy and beneficial.`
I have yet to meet anyone who considers our vigorous debate on EU membership as harmful to the country`s interest.` Indeed most consider it healthy and beneficial.
Especially the colleagues from candidate countries well understand the different circumstances prevailing in Malta which explains our taking a different point of view. A colleague from the Baltic States explains that the real reason why they want to join is security and if NATO moves quicker than the EU to offer membership then the politcal cause for EU membership will be considerably devalued.
`Another colleague from a former communist country explains that public support for EU membership is waning considerably once the agricultural benefits which were implied in membership are being substantially diluted by what is being offered during negotiations on the agricultural chapter.
They well understand that in coming to a final decision about EU membership Malta has to ask where is the beef And indeed with existing free access of our industrial manufactures, our minute agricultural sector which holds no hope of accessing EU markets, obscure prospects of any net funding benefits (as a country, not simply at government level) it is difficult to perceive any real tangible benefit.
And these are issues that need to be discussed and not approached dogmatically as the bishops are often accustomed to do. Consensus with dogma is easy to reach.` But dogma has no place outside religion. Hence consensus may be difficult in the economic and political world and has to be worked for earnestly and gradually without accusing opponents as harming the national interest.
`Consensus with dogma is easy to reach.` But dogma has no place outside religion`
Proponents of EU membership tend to justify their position by pretending that the recognition and security offered by membership will increase the flow of FDI and thus enhance our economic performance.` Opponents suggest that the higher cost base offered by membership will scare away both prospective as well as existing investment and that the recognition and security benefits could be achieved by negotiating a partnership deal with the EU,` the way Switzerland and others have done.
My position for the latter proposal is known. But I am not dogmatic about it and keep myself open to be convinced otherwise if circumstances should change. I am certainly not accusing holders of the former proposal as failing the national interest.
If any such failing exist it is only by their not giving due priority to the domestic problems and pinning all solutions onto EU membership when really the structural adjustment necessary depends on our inner strengths, will and leadership.
The Maltese bishops feel that in the eyes of Europe and the world Malta is a divided nation.` They appealed to political parties to act in the national interest by reaching a consensus on the European Union issue.
`Normally were consenus is required and it is unobtainable for whatever reason, the status quo prevails.`
By implication, through exercising their democratic right to hold genuinely different views over the issue, the government and/or the opposition are acting against the national interest. This is unfair and untrue.
The bishops do not indicate on which side of the debate the consensus should fall. Normally were consensus is required and it is unobtainable for whatever reason, the status quo prevails.
So reaching consensus on a status quo, even if for a limited period of time until the whole matter can be reviewed in the light of unfolding circumstances, could indeed be a wise and practical solution.
But accusing anybody who holds a different point of view of harming the country`s interest or that the country could be harmed by the inability to achieve consensus is unnecessarily alarmist.
I am presently attending an international seminar on the reform of international institutions to give a human face to the globalisation process.` I am in company of several delegates coming from existing and prospective country members of the EU.
`I have yet to meet anyone who considers our vigorous debate on EU membership as harmful to the country`s interest.` Indeed most consider it healthy and beneficial.`
I have yet to meet anyone who considers our vigorous debate on EU membership as harmful to the country`s interest.` Indeed most consider it healthy and beneficial.
Especially the colleagues from candidate countries well understand the different circumstances prevailing in Malta which explains our taking a different point of view. A colleague from the Baltic States explains that the real reason why they want to join is security and if NATO moves quicker than the EU to offer membership then the politcal cause for EU membership will be considerably devalued.
`Another colleague from a former communist country explains that public support for EU membership is waning considerably once the agricultural benefits which were implied in membership are being substantially diluted by what is being offered during negotiations on the agricultural chapter.
They well understand that in coming to a final decision about EU membership Malta has to ask where is the beef And indeed with existing free access of our industrial manufactures, our minute agricultural sector which holds no hope of accessing EU markets, obscure prospects of any net funding benefits (as a country, not simply at government level) it is difficult to perceive any real tangible benefit.
And these are issues that need to be discussed and not approached dogmatically as the bishops are often accustomed to do. Consensus with dogma is easy to reach.` But dogma has no place outside religion. Hence consensus may be difficult in the economic and political world and has to be worked for earnestly and gradually without accusing opponents as harming the national interest.
`Consensus with dogma is easy to reach.` But dogma has no place outside religion`
Proponents of EU membership tend to justify their position by pretending that the recognition and security offered by membership will increase the flow of FDI and thus enhance our economic performance.` Opponents suggest that the higher cost base offered by membership will scare away both prospective as well as existing investment and that the recognition and security benefits could be achieved by negotiating a partnership deal with the EU,` the way Switzerland and others have done.
My position for the latter proposal is known. But I am not dogmatic about it and keep myself open to be convinced otherwise if circumstances should change. I am certainly not accusing holders of the former proposal as failing the national interest.
If any such failing exist it is only by their not giving due priority to the domestic problems and pinning all solutions onto EU membership when really the structural adjustment necessary depends on our inner strengths, will and leadership.
No comments:
Post a Comment