Sunday 7 April 2002

Surprised by the Obvious

The Malta Independent on Sunday



With the local elections out of the way with maximum damage, the government and PN strategists need plenty of thought and discussion to see how their overstay in power and the EU accession project could be saved from a similar fate.

`Like a fruit out of season it would be wrong to pick it off its tree before the mature season`

All sorts of permutations have started being thrown up for consideration.` A referendum to be followed by a general election, a referendum and a general election in one suffrage outturn, or a straight general election which in so far as the EU issue is concerned would also be a referendum. A fourth option would be a general election to be followed by a referendum if the elected government wishes to pursue the EU membership project.

One ought to hope that decisions are taken in the national interest and not purely in the interest of the party that happens to have the right to take such decisions.

And I have been saying it ad nauseam that a referendum before the election which would in any event be due in a matter of months is not in the national interest.

As a Labour candidate this could be easily interpreted as fear of losing the referendum that prejudice the party`s prospects in the following elections. Whilst this interpretation comes easy, my motivations are different. And anybody who has been following my writing ought to know it.

All those who blame the disastrous local election results on the mediocre state of the national economy (it`s the economy stupid syndrome) ought to know that the chances of a referendum being won by the forces against the yes vote (the no`s; the don`t know;` the don`t care; the protest vote) in a straight referendum are not small.

But this is not in the national interest as it would close for a long number of years the possibility of membership at a time when the EU may have to reform itself into a flexible model permitting membership on the partnership lines promoted by the MLP.

Before the electors are presented with a straight yes or no decision on the EU issue there must prevail two important conditions. The issue must firstly be taken off the partisan agenda.` EU accession would be an irreversible decision which is best taken as one nation where the yes or no vote carry a very large majority.` This is only possible when there is more congruence of thought about the matter by our political schools. Like a fruit out of season it would be wrong to pick it off its tree before the mature season.

Secondly the EU issue must be decided only in the context of a strong economy to ensure that we make a smart not a forced decision.

I have recently been criticised for expressing these opinions by those who pretend to have a divine right to take us into the EU whatever the costs and consequences. As a defence they generally produce two main streams of arguments.

Firstly is that waiting for a more opportune time to join the EU would be like missing the last train to heaven and we would miss out on the funding that would be available upon accession at the next enlargement when such funding would not be available should we join later in the company of Rumania and Bulgaria.

the country needs a general election to get the leadership it deserves.` Pro-EU observers should stop being surprised by the obvious`

This is a myth as big as the Lm100 million promised before last election.` There could be many good reasons for wanting to join the EU but for goodness sake, funding should not be one of them. Under all scenarios, Malta as a whole, not just the government as an entity, would at best be funding neutral vs. the EU and probably we would be net contributors.` Any direct funding payable to us under the various schemes would be more than compensated by our direct contributions (percentages of VAT and GDP) and indirect contributions (higher food prices for imports from EU and Common External tariff for imports outside the EU).

A more serious argument is that this country can only survive economically if we start marketing ourselves better to re-generate a stream of foreign direct investment into our economy.` This, the argument goes, is only possible, as EU members.

I consider this argument fallacious. Clich`s and membership badges do not attract foreign investors. FDI is attracted by a strong economy, availability of trained labour, and an efficient pro-business bureaucracy. None of this is dependent upon EU membership.` On the contrary they are dependent on our own internal will to lead ourselves seriously, to re-structure our economy and to stop the waste of throwing our limited resources into subsidies leading to nowhere. All this whilst pretending to be born members of the rich man`s club when in fact we seriously mortgaging our economic future with an unsustainable level of debt.

When a time will arrive when we can look at ourselves in the mirror and start liking what we see, than that could be a time when we seriously start debating EU membership on its own merits especially if the EU would have changed sufficiently to permit the flexibility we seek and deserve.

Before that the country needs a general election to get the leadership it deserves.` Pro-EU observers should stop being surprised by the obvious.

Alfred Mifsud



No comments:

Post a Comment