Re-inventing Ourselves

The Malta Independent on Sunday

In order to function effectively with more than 25 countries the EU would have to re-invent itself.    The decisions taken at the Nice Summit, which still need approval by reversal of the Irish negative referendum outcome, are insufficient for the sort of task required.

“if the Convention were to come out in favour of a constitutional treaty likely to lead to the approval of a genuine constitution by all the people of Europe, it would be difficult to keep most of these derogations on board.”

 

This task falls on the broad-based Giscard d’Estaing Convention which is expected to propose a new EU Treaty to be adopted as a constitution replacing the four existing treaties.

 

In submitting its proposal for the formulation of the Treaty the Prodi Commission last week underlined the need to review all derogations given to member states.   It argues that “if the Convention were to come out in favour of a constitutional treaty likely to lead to the approval of a genuine constitution by all the people of Europe, it would be difficult to keep most of these derogations on board.”  In simple language the Commission is arguing for uniformity in application of EU rules and is expressing itself not only against new derogations to prospective members but is also urging the re-appraisal of existing ones given to existing member members.  This includes the temporary opt-out given to UK, Sweden and Denmark from the Euro monetary system.

 

This attitude by the Commission is understandable if it is to render itself as an effective executive arm of the Union, implementing the decisions taken in the Council.   The Commission is urging the Council to adopt qualified majority decision making throughout, abolishing all remaining vetoes related to the single market, including social and fiscal matters.

 

Reading these proposals make me just reflect on what sort of negotiations candidate countries, Malta included, are conducting with the EU.    We are regularly bombarded with foreign visitors who proclaim how impressed they are with the negotiations we are conducting.   In reality, the room for negotiation does not go beyond the length of the transitional adjustment period, leaving little opportunity for use of negotiating skills.   It is a known tactic of successful negotiators who while conceded little or nothing, praise the opponent to make him feel good not with the result but with the appearance.

“And if the EU Commission is itself suggesting a two pronged approach with alternatives to membership, why is our government refusing to consider other alternatives?    Why is the government or MIC unwilling to give information about the EEA?”

 

We have to be serious and realistic in deciding our future relations with the EU.   We cannot harbour illusions.    If the Commission will have its way, and frankly it is the only way how to keep a Union functioning effectively, Malta has to accept that it will become irrevocably a tiny member of a large organisation and has to undertake the full rigour of EU rules if not immediately, eventually.

 

In fact the Commission document goes on to state: “These considerations make a compelling case for a critical reappraisal of these derogations.   The Convention should confirm that an a’ la carte Europe is not the right option for the development of the Union.  When the time comes to prepare a constitutional treaty, political attention should focus on the implications of joining the Union, by comparison with other formulas, such as those used within the European Economic Area (EEA)”

 

Interesting!    Is not the EU Commission suggesting that membership a’ la carte is unrealistic and that those members, existing or prospective, who seek different arrangements, should consider other formulas giving EEA as an example of another possible formula?

 

And if the EU Commission is itself suggesting a two pronged approach with alternatives to membership, why is our government refusing to consider other alternatives?    Why is the government or MIC unwilling to give information about the EEA?

 

Whilst Labour’s partnership option does not necessarily equate to the EEA, study of the EEA could be the lowest denominator of other possible relations Malta could have with the EU.

 

I firmly believe that economically Malta can compete globally, not just in the EU.    My vision is for the country to become fully aware of our strengths and limitations,   adopt a nationwide plan to maximise the efficiency in the use of existing resources, and have the economy growing consistently at a real annual rate of 6% and over.  

“But we will do all this because we want to not because we are obliged.“

 

If we find the inner strength and leadership to achieve this result we will have no problems whatsoever in adopting the basic freedoms of the EU single market.   With this sort of growth we will need foreign guest workers to keep the cost of labour competitive and avoid damaging inflation impulses.   This would augment the flow of social security income making our health and pension system sustainable through increased economic participation.   It would give us a cushion to contain the harshness of domestic unemployment during times of unavoidable economic downturns.

 

But we will do all this because we want to not because we are obliged.   We will not do many other things which we could otherwise be also obliged to;  like eradicate completely the small but strategic agriculture sector and embark on a one way train to a common foreign policy eventually leading to common defence policy rendering our neutrality of dubious practical effect.

 

Rather than burn resources trying to join an EU which is still trying to invent itself it would be far more productive and effective if we embark on a national plan to re-invent ourselves; to shed off the money no problem culture which has rendered us so helpless and subservient as to look at the EU as the only solution to save us from ourselves