l-orizzont - Is-Sibt 19 ta' Diċembru 2009
IL-KRIŻI finanzjarja ħalliet ħafna vittmi. Apparti l-impatt li r-riċessjoni kellha fuq il-pajjiżi kollha tad-dinja, jispikkaw żewġ każi partikolari. Fis-sena 2008 il-prosperità mibnija f’daqqa fuq is-settur bankarju li esperjenzat l-Islanda, ikkollassat, u l-pajjiż effettivament falla. Ftit tal-jiem ilu l-waqgħa tal-kumpanija statali Dubai World niżżlet lil Dubai għarkuptejh. L-investi¬turi issa qegħdin jitħassbu serjament dwar il-possibiltà li jkun hemm pajjiżi oħrajn li jgħaddu mill-istess esperjenza kawża tad-djun tagħhom. Fiz-Żona Ewro hemm pajjiż wieħed li kulħadd qed jitħasseb dwaru bħala li jista’ jgħaddi mill-istess esperjenza: il-Greċja. Wieħed jistaqsi: il-Greċja se tkun l-Islanda taż-Żona Ewro u tbatti taħt id-djun tagħha? M’hemm ebda dubju li l-Greċja tinsab f’inkwiet ekono¬miku kbir ħafna. Sitwazzjoni li wasslet biex jitbaxxa l-livell ta’ ‘credit rating’ tal-Greċja, li minn A tniżżel għal A-. Sadanittant id-differenza fir-rati tal-imgħax fuq il-bonds kompliet tiżdied bejn il-bonds tal-Gvern Grieg u dawk Ġer¬maniżi kompliet tit¬wessa, minkejja l-fatt li l-Greċja diġà ħallset ferm aktar fuq il-bonds tagħha minn kull pajjiż ieħor tal-Unjoni Ewropea. Il-Ministru tal-Finanzi l-ġdid tal-Greċja, George Papa¬constantinou, wasal biex jikteb artiklu fil-Wall Street Journal fi sforz biex jassigura lill-investituri u lill-kummentaturi finanzjarji li waqt li l-pajjiż jinsab f’riċessjoni u qed jiffaċċja sitwazzjoni fiskali gravi, il-Greċja mhux se tfalli. Huwa veru li l-“problema Griega” mhix xi ħaġa ġdida. Il-Greċja għaddiet parti kbira minn dawn l-aħħar għaxar snin bi djun dejjem jikbru u b’defiċits fil-baġits għoljin mmens. Dwar dan id-defiċit il-Gvern Soċjalista attwali wiret mingħand il-Gvern Konservattiv “kotba mbagħbsin”. Id-defiċit għal din is-sena mistenni jkun jammonta għal 12.7% tal-Prodott Gross Domestiku, kuntrarjament għal 8% kif kien dikjarat mill-Gvern Konservattiv. Huwa pproġettat li sas-sena 2011 id-dejn tal-Gvern Grieg mistenni jkun tela’ għal 135%. Il-Greċja, bħall-Italja u ħafna pajjiżi oħrajn tal-Unjoni Ewro¬pea, kienu qegħdin iħarsu lejn iż-Żona Ewro bħala l-verżjoni moderna tal-Arka ta’ Noe li ssalvahom mid-diżastru finanzjarju. Bħal Malta, il-Greċja ħadet miżuri fil-qosor biex tassigura li tin¬għaqad mal-Ewro malajr, imma m’għamlitx ir-riformi strutturali fil-fond biex tassigura pro¬dut¬tività akbar kif ukoll is-sostenn tal-programmi tas-settur pubbliku. Madankollu, il-Gvern Soċjalista Grieg wera li fehem il-gravità tas-sitwazzjoni u hu lest li jaġixxi. Il-Prim Ministru Grieg, George Papandreou, ġimgħa biss wara li ngħata s-setgħa f’Ottubru li ghadda, ammetta li l-ekonomija ta’ pajjiżu kienet “fil-kura intensiva” u żied li l-Greċja kienet qed tiffaċċja “l-agħar kriżi ekonomika mir-ritorn għad-demokrazija”. Papandreou għandu l-vantaġġ li l-opinjoni pubblika hija konxja tad-diżastru li wiret il-Gvern tiegħu u dan għandu jagħtih l-appoġġ pubbliku għall-miżuri meħtieġa imma mhux popolari. Il-Prim Ministru Grieg ippropona abbozz ta’ baġit li filwaqt li jinkludi programm ta’ stimulu finanzjarju ta’ tliet biljun ewro; nefqa akbar fl-edukaz¬zjoni u s-saħħa, fl-istess ħin tnaqqis fin-nefqa f’oqsma oħra. Miżuri li jinkludu tnaqqis ta’ 25% fuq il-konsum tal-Gvern; iffriżar fuq l-impjiegi fis-servizz ċivili, b’mod li jkun impjegat wieħed għal kull ħames impjiegi li jispiċċaw bl-età tal-irtirar; kif ukoll tnaqqis fin-nefqa għad-difiża. Il-Gvern wiegħed ukoll riforma fil-pensjoni u miżuri biex tkun miġġielda l-evażjoni tat-taxxa. Il-Gvern Grieg qed jittama li b’riżultat ta’ dawn il-miżuri, sa tmiem is-sena 2010 id-deficit ikun tniżżel għal 9.1%. Tamiet sbieħ li għad iridu jkunu kumplimentati bir-riżultati. Ir-reazzjoni tas-swieq finanzjarji turi li huma ferm bogħod minn konvinti. Ħaġa waħda hija ċerta: il-Greċja, u min hu bħalha, ma jistgħux jistennew wisq favuri mill-Unjoni Ewropea. Il-Patt tal-Unjoni Ewropea għall-Istabilità u Tkabbir (SGP), li jistipula li l-pajjiżi membri għandhom iżommu l-livelli tad-djun taħt is-60% u d-defiċit tal-baġit taħt it-3%, ħa daqqa sewwa waqt il-kriżi. Fil-verità l-pajjiżi kollha tal-Unjoni Ewropea, inkluż Malta, kisru dak li jgħid l-SGP, bil-Kummissjoni u l-Bank Ċentrali Ewropew f’attentati ddisprati biex jassiguraw li r-regoli tagħhom li jinkoraġġixxu pru¬denza fiskali ma jkunux abbandunati totalment. Fil-laqgħa tal-Ministri tal-Finanzi Ewropej ta’ ftit jiem ilu, il-Greċja ppreparat lilha nnifis¬ha għal penalitajiet iebsin. Fi kliem ieħor, huwa possibbli li l-Greċja tintalab tagħmel baġit supplimentari li fih jintalab aktar tnaqqis. Jien xorta għadni nemmen li l-Greċja ssalva. Bħala mem¬bru taz-Żona Ewro mhux se tit¬ħalla ma ssalvax, bil-President tal-Bank Ċentrali Ewropew, Trichet, ikompli jwarrab mistoqsijiet tal-ġurnalisti dwar il-possibiltà li pajjiż fl-Ewro jispiċċa fallut. Iż-Żona Ewro hija għaqda po¬litika daqskemm hija għaqda ekonomika u finanzjarja. Ikun imbaraz¬zanti ferm għall-Unjoni Ewropea kieku kellu jiġri li pajjiż jaqa’ mill-Ewro. Allura wara kollox, wieħed jista’ jgħid li l-fatt li tkun mem¬bru tal-Ewro jiggarantixxi protezzjoni milli ċċedi taħt id-dejn nazzjonali? Mhux daqs¬tant b’mod mgħaġġel. It-tweġiba hija fl-affermattiv, imma mhux għar-raġunijiet implikati minn dawk li jsostnu l-verżjoni tal-Arka ta’ Noe. Filfatt is-salvazzjoni, jekk, u meta sseħħ, se sseħħ b’riżultat ta’ dixxiplina mis-suq, mir-’Rating Agencies’ u mill-IMF, minn pressjoni tal-Patt tal-Unjoni Ewropea għall-Istabilità u t-Tkabbir… kollha flimkien. Huwa permezz ta’ sagrifiċċji enormi u miżuri iebsin furzati fuq pajjiż membru taż-Żona Ewro li finalment iwasslu biex isalvaw pajjiż minn falliment. Definittivament l-Unjoni Ewropea mhux se sservi ta’ salvatur faċli. Minkejja kollox, l-istorja Griega għandha sservi ta’ twissija b’saħħitha lil pajjiżi membri oħrajn, fosthom Malta. It-tkabbir tad-djun u d-defiċits tal-baġit, tbagħbis tal-kotba u l-fehma li sħubija fl-Ewro se tipprovdi ċekk mif¬tuħ, eventwalment iwassluk għal saram kbir. Mingħajr finanzi pubbliċi kredibbli u dixxiplina fiskali u monetarja, ir-ritorn sostenibbli għal tkabbir ekonomiku u normalità m’huma xejn aktar minn ħolma sew jekk tkun membru taż-Żona Ewro kif ukoll jekk tkun barra.
27.2.10
When Brussels called our bluff
The Times - Tuesday, 17th November 2009
I suppose we should all be glad that our Minister of Finance has finally come to the conclusion that it is impossible for Malta to meet the 2010 deadline to correct its excessive deficit and to ask for the Commission to extend its deadline for Malta. It is, however, pertinent to ask why it has taken him so long to do just that. Back in July, one of my first actions as a new MEP was to table a parliamentary question to the European Commission asking why Malta had only been given a year to cut its deficit from 4.5 per cent to three per cent while other countries had been given deadlines of 2013 or even longer. Essentially, the Commission's reply ignored the recommendations made by the IMF proposing a 2013 deadline and added that "special circumstances" for Malta did not exist. In my maiden speech to the Parliament in Strasbourg in September, in advance of the G20 summit in the United States the following week, I returned to the theme. The EU Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, Joaquin Almunia, told us twice (once in committee and then the following day in Parliament) that no EU country should stop economic stimulus packages until we can see a clear return to economic growth. Indeed, there is general agreement on this across the EU and in the US. But how could Malta cut its deficit by over 1.5 per cent without damaging our long-term economic and employment prospects? It was a completely contradictory position, and I said so. All along, the government and my two MEP colleagues from the EPP were giving the impression that the government intended to keep to its Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDF) deadline and my repeated imploring with EU officials was practically frowned upon. The reasons for this are not hard to tell. This Nationalist government's behaviour follows a familiar template. One: when the economy is in trouble keep a stiff upper lip and deny any problems. Two: give optimistic budgetary forecasts so that negative outcomes could be portrayed as unexpected surprises rather than entirely predictable outcomes. This negotiating strategy was so well played that, initially, the EU Commission believed the ruse that our excessive deficit was transient and not significant. I did point out at the time that I could not believe the Commission could be so naïve. It was not. Just a few weeks later the Commission called the government's bluff, seemingly taking at face value the government's inaccurate and misleading assertion that Malta's excessive deficit was just a one-off slip and would be swiftly corrected. For this reason, while confirming that the deficit was structural and not transient, it duly slapped an EDP on Malta and gave us the shortest compliance deadline of any other EU member state in a similar predicament. The government should never have allowed to paint itself into such a tight corner with so little room to manoeuvre. How else can one explain the 2010 Budget where the government not only shirked from taking bold economic measures, such as cutting VAT on tourism-related services, but instead is forced to introduce a spate of hidden taxes by reducing its budgetary allocations to rent seeking organisations and corporations that are now expected to collect their revenues from new tariffs and other charges. In short, the government is in a difficult economic position that has greatly reduced its capacity to introduce effectively vital economic stimulus measures. This spring, the Commission, in responding to the Stability Programme for 2009 by the government, stated that "the risks of Malta delivering on any of its risks are high". They were being generous. Thanks to a dose of cosmetic accounting and more one-off schemes, the government gives, as always, the impression that its deficit is under control. In reality it is very obvious that the government cannot deliver on its promises to reduce our national debt and budget deficit. Minister Fenech tells us that a contraction in Malta's economy means that the circumstances have changed from when the EU made its decision in May about Malta's excessive deficit. The truth is that nothing has changed except his own perception of reality, which has been staring him in the face all along. Prof. Scicluna is a Labour member of the European Parliament.
I suppose we should all be glad that our Minister of Finance has finally come to the conclusion that it is impossible for Malta to meet the 2010 deadline to correct its excessive deficit and to ask for the Commission to extend its deadline for Malta. It is, however, pertinent to ask why it has taken him so long to do just that. Back in July, one of my first actions as a new MEP was to table a parliamentary question to the European Commission asking why Malta had only been given a year to cut its deficit from 4.5 per cent to three per cent while other countries had been given deadlines of 2013 or even longer. Essentially, the Commission's reply ignored the recommendations made by the IMF proposing a 2013 deadline and added that "special circumstances" for Malta did not exist. In my maiden speech to the Parliament in Strasbourg in September, in advance of the G20 summit in the United States the following week, I returned to the theme. The EU Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, Joaquin Almunia, told us twice (once in committee and then the following day in Parliament) that no EU country should stop economic stimulus packages until we can see a clear return to economic growth. Indeed, there is general agreement on this across the EU and in the US. But how could Malta cut its deficit by over 1.5 per cent without damaging our long-term economic and employment prospects? It was a completely contradictory position, and I said so. All along, the government and my two MEP colleagues from the EPP were giving the impression that the government intended to keep to its Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDF) deadline and my repeated imploring with EU officials was practically frowned upon. The reasons for this are not hard to tell. This Nationalist government's behaviour follows a familiar template. One: when the economy is in trouble keep a stiff upper lip and deny any problems. Two: give optimistic budgetary forecasts so that negative outcomes could be portrayed as unexpected surprises rather than entirely predictable outcomes. This negotiating strategy was so well played that, initially, the EU Commission believed the ruse that our excessive deficit was transient and not significant. I did point out at the time that I could not believe the Commission could be so naïve. It was not. Just a few weeks later the Commission called the government's bluff, seemingly taking at face value the government's inaccurate and misleading assertion that Malta's excessive deficit was just a one-off slip and would be swiftly corrected. For this reason, while confirming that the deficit was structural and not transient, it duly slapped an EDP on Malta and gave us the shortest compliance deadline of any other EU member state in a similar predicament. The government should never have allowed to paint itself into such a tight corner with so little room to manoeuvre. How else can one explain the 2010 Budget where the government not only shirked from taking bold economic measures, such as cutting VAT on tourism-related services, but instead is forced to introduce a spate of hidden taxes by reducing its budgetary allocations to rent seeking organisations and corporations that are now expected to collect their revenues from new tariffs and other charges. In short, the government is in a difficult economic position that has greatly reduced its capacity to introduce effectively vital economic stimulus measures. This spring, the Commission, in responding to the Stability Programme for 2009 by the government, stated that "the risks of Malta delivering on any of its risks are high". They were being generous. Thanks to a dose of cosmetic accounting and more one-off schemes, the government gives, as always, the impression that its deficit is under control. In reality it is very obvious that the government cannot deliver on its promises to reduce our national debt and budget deficit. Minister Fenech tells us that a contraction in Malta's economy means that the circumstances have changed from when the EU made its decision in May about Malta's excessive deficit. The truth is that nothing has changed except his own perception of reality, which has been staring him in the face all along. Prof. Scicluna is a Labour member of the European Parliament.
Meta l-UE qliet lill-Gvern f’żejtu
www.l-orizzont.com - L-Erbgħa 18 ta' Novembru 2009
NISSOPPONI li kollha għandna nkunu kuntenti li finalment il-Ministru tal-Finanzi wasal għall-konklużjoni li huwa impossibbli li Malta tirregola d-defiċit eċċessiv tagħha sas-sena 2010 u li jitlob lill-Kummissjoni Ewropea testendi t-terminu għal Malta biex tilħaq dan il-għan. Madan-kollu, huwa pertinenti li nistaqsu għaliex il-Ministru Fenech ħa daqstant żmien biex jagħmel proprju dan. Lura f’Lulju li għadda, fost l-ewwel ħidmiet tiegħi bħala Membru Parlamentari Ewropew, kienet interpellanza bil-miktub li biha staqsejt lill-Kummissjoni Ewropea għaliex Malta kienet ingħatat biss sena żmien biex tnaqqas id-defiċit tagħha minn 4.5% għal 3% meta pajjiżi oħrajn ingħataw żmien sas-sena 2013 u anke aktar. Essenzjalment it-tweġiba tal-Kummissjoni injorat ir-rakkomandazzjonijiet tal-Fond Monetarju Internazzjonali (IMF) li ppropona żmien sas-sena 2013 u qalet li “ċirkostanzi speċjali” għal Malta ma jeżistux. Fl-ewwel diskors tiegħi lill-Parlament Ewropew fi Strasbourg f’Settembru li għadda bi preparazzjoni għas-summit tal-G20 fl-Istati Uniti l-ġimgħa ta’ wara, erġajt qajjimt il-każ tad-defiċit ta’ Malta. Joaquin Almunia, il-Kummissarju Ewropew għall-Affarijiet Ekonomiċi u Monetarji, qalilna dar-btejn (darba fil-kumitat u l-għada fil-Parlament) li ebda pajjiż membru tal-Unjoni Ewropea m’għandu jwaqqaf il-pakkett ta’ stimulu ekonomiku qabel ma nkunu nistgħu naraw ritorn ċar għal tkabbir ekonomiku. Hemm qbil ġenerali dwar dan kemm fl-Unjoni Ewropea kif ukoll fl-Istati Uniti. Imma Malta kif tista’ tnaqqas id-defiċit tagħ-ha b’aktar minn 1.5% bla ma tagħmel ħsara lill-prospetti fit-tul fl-oqsma ekonomiċi u tax-xogħol? Kienet pożizzjoni kontradittorja kompletament, u dan hu dak li kont għidt. Sadattant, il-Gvern u ż-żewġ Membri Parlamentari Ewropej Nazzjonalisti kienu qegħdin jagħtu l-impressjoni li l-Gvern kien intenzjonat li jżomm maż-żmien mogħti għal tnaqqis fid-defiċit (EDP - Excessive Deficit Procedures), u prattikament jirrabjaw għall-appelli tiegħi ma’ uffiċjali tal-Unjoni Ewropea. Ir-raġunijiet għal dan mhux diffiċli tasal għalihom. L-attitudni tal-Gvern Nazzjonalista ssegwi mudell familjari. L-ewwel: meta l-ekonomija tkun fl-inkwiet, iċħad li hemm problemi. It-tieni: agħti tbassir baġitarju ottimistiku biex ir-riżultati negattivi jitpinġew bħala sorpriżi mhux mistennijin flok riżultati kompletament prevedibbli. Inizjalment din l-istrateġija ta’ negozjar intlagħbet tajjeb ħafna, tant li l-Kummissjoni Ewropea emmnet l-istrataġemma li d-defiċit eċċessiv kien wieħed li jgħaddi malajr u mhux wieħed sinifikanti. Dak iż-żmien kont irrimarkajt li ma stajtx nemmen li l-Kummissjoni Ewropea kienet daqstant “fidila”. Ma kinitx. Ftit ġimgħat wara l-Kummissjoni qliet lill-Gvern Malti f’żejtu, billi tat l-impressjoni li qiegħda tieħu bħala vera d-dikjarazzjoni żbaljata u qarrieqa tal-Gvern li d-defiċit eċċessiv kien nuqqas ta’ darba li jista’ jkun malajr ikkoreġut. Għal din ir-raġuni, waqt li kkonfermat li d-defiċit kien wieħed strutturali u mhux li jgħaddi malajr, ħabbtet ma’ wiċċ Malta EDP u tatna l-iqsar terminu ta’ żmien biex id-defiċit jinġieb f’postu meta kkomparat ma’ kif imxiet ma’ pajjiżi oħrajn membri tal-Unjoni Ewropea li kienu fl-istess sitwazzjoni tagħna. Il-Gvern qatt ma messu poġġa lilu nnifsu f’rokna ristretta bħal din bi ftit spazju fejn jimmanuvra. Kif jista’ xi ħadd jispjega b’mod ieħor il-Baġit għas-sena 2010 fejn il-Gvern mhux biss żamm lura milli jieħu miżuri ekonomiċi sodi, bħal tnaqqis tal-VAT fuq servizzi relatati mat-turiżmu, imma minflok kien sforzat jintroduċi taxxi moħbijin billi jnaqqas allokazzjonijiet finanzjarji fil-Baġit lill-organizzazzjonijiet u korporazzjonijiet li issa huma mistennijin li jiġbru huma l-flus minn tariffi ġodda u ogħla, u ħlasijiet oħrajn. Fi ftit kliem, il-Gvern jinsab f’sitwazzjoni ekonomika diffiċli li naqqsitlu bil-kbir l-kapaċità tiegħu li jintroduċi miżuri effettivi u vitali biex jistimula l-ekonomija. Fir-rebbiegħa li għaddiet, il-Kummissjoni, meta kienet qie-għda twieġeb għall-Programm ta’ Stabilità mill-Gvern għas-sena 2009, qalet li “r-riskji li Malta twassal fuq xi wieħed mir-riskji li ħadet, huma għoljin”. Kienu ġenerużi magħna meta qalu hekk. Grazzi għal doża ta’ kontijiet kosmetiċi u aktar skemi ta’ darba, il-Gvern, bħal dejjem, jagħti l-impressjoni li d-defiċit huwa taħt kontroll. Fil-verità huwa ferm ovvju li l-Gvern Nazzjonalista ma jistax isarraf il-wegħdi tiegħu li jnaqqas id-dejn nazzjonali u kif ukoll d-defiċit tal-Baġit. Il-Ministru Fenech jgħidilna li tnaqqis fl-ekonomija Maltija jfisser li ċ-ċirkostanzi nbidlu minn meta f’Mejju li għadda l-Unjoni Ewropea ħadet id-deċiż-joni tagħha dwar id-defiċit eċ-ċessiv ta’ Malta. Il-verità hi li xejn ma nbidel ħlief il-mod tal-Ministru stess ta’ kif iħares lejn ir-realtà li ilha tħares fiss f’għajnejh it-triq kollha.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)