By Sharon Ellul Bonici

The seven-year transitional period on the free movement of labour gave rise to much elation. Foreign Minister Joe Borg has reportedly described the agreement as "a big achievement" adding that it was a "tough nut to crack". The following day, the head of the negotiating team, Richard Cachia Caruana, pointed out that the agreement provided two significant aspects: first, "a clear signal to us that the EU understands our requests and realises the specific needs of our country." And secondly, that "it is evidence of the trust and goodwill that Malta enjoys."

In reality this concession was just a piece of good PR for both the Maltese government and the EU. It was an exercise aimed to quell Maltese fears, and it carries an insignificant price tag.

According to Foreign Minister Joe Borg, should Malta join, work permits to EU citizens would be granted "automatically". Decisions to refuse work permits may then be applied to specific individuals or sectors. At face value it would appear that this agreement safeguards the interests of Malta, however the proviso that such cases are to be "urgent and exceptional" means that the automatic influx of foreign labour would only be sporadically interrupted if at all.

True, it is significant that "restrictions may be imposed unilaterally by Malta". But while this would appear to rule out any requirement for Malta and the EU to define what is to be considered "urgent and exceptional", it does not mean that Malta would be able to take such decisions arbitrarily. The EU will still hold the right to question the ‘urgency and exceptionality’ of the ‘case’ under scrutiny.

The second safeguard, allowing the Maltese government to seek a further remedy after seven years, is superfluous. It should be obvious for any Applicant or Member State to retain the right to seek remedies in matters concerning social upheaval. To treat this right as a temporary concession requiring negotiation only confirms the state of affairs in today’s EU.

If this temporary agreement is an "achievement" and "a sign of goodwill", then it is no wonder that many perceive the negotiating process as an act of compliance.

Ms Ellul Bonici is the Executive Secretary of the Campaign for National Independence

 
By David Casa

The package negotiated by Malta with the EU regarding the free movement of persons is a laudable achievement. The results obtained from these negotiations are vital to the YES campaign for they put to shame the major scare-mongering tactic employed by the NO camp: that of an invasion by foreign job-seekers coming to Malta to take our jobs and send us, queuing to the ETC.

One must appreciate that the concept of freedom of movement of workers within the EU has not been that much of a success story, owing to the reluctance of EU citizens to move around in search of work. Movement of workers between EU Member States has, since the inception of the concept, stood constantly at an average two per cent. Regardless of freedom of movement, whilst Northern Italy craves for worker-supply, the jobless in Sicily are hesitant to move there, opting instead, to rely on generous, unemployment benefits churned out by the State.

This scenario has repeatedly been confirmed by various, foreign guests brought over by the local NO lobby namely the CNI. Helle Hagenau from Finland, Patricia Mc Kenna from Ireland and Lord Norman Lamont from the UK, amongst others, while dishing out their fair share of euro scepticism, have all played down one of their hosts' favourite arguments. Movement of workers between EU Member States is negligible and the prospect of a 'foreign invasion' of Malta is a mere fantasy.

It is my firm opinion that the agreement reached by Malta with the EU regarding this matter was not at all necessary, since all EU trends and statistics show that there is no ground for such fear.

Obtaining such a concession in writing would put many minds at rest and help to ensure the approval of the whole packet of negotiations in the upcoming referendum.

Austria used a similar ploy during its negotiating phase. It obtained a concession from the EU in order to re-assure the well-known scepticism of the Austrians regarding foreign workers. Austria is in the centre of the EU mainland and it became an EU member in 1993. Today, in 2001 this clause has never been invoked!

Mr Casa is the Secretary General of the IVA Movement