|
Social partners object to
local councils in MCED
by Ivan Brincat
The social partners have objected to a government proposal to
include local councils in the Malta Council for Economic Development
and have made it clear in their proposed amendments to the law
sent to government.
Tony Zarb, the secretary general of the General Workers’
Union said yesterday that the government wanted to make local
council representation an integral part of the MCED.
“All the social partners disagree with this proposal and
in fact have asked for it to be removed from the proposed law.”
Mr Zarb said the proposed law gives government more control
within the MCED. On the insistence of the government, the co-chairman
of the Council is to be the permanent secretary in the Office
of the Prime Minister. He said it was not true, as stated by
Social Policy Minister Lawrence Gonzi, that the social partners
had only objected to two parts of the proposed law. “This
is not correct as the GWU alone made proposals on each part
of the law,” he said.
Mr Zarb said there was agreement on every part of the law. The
MCED met twice to discuss the law and make proposed amendments.
“The GWU proposals are all included in the MCED’s
final document.”
The GWU have been insisting since February that more importance
should be give to the MCED since this is so far only a debating
society. Mr Zarb said the union believed that the social partners
should be represented in the Employment and Training Corporation,
the Retail Price Index and the Statistics Department. He said
the GWU also believed that various associations should have
their voice heard in the MCED.
Mr Zarb said the GWU had in fact proposed that there should
be an assembly which includes all the associations in the MCED
and which should hold consultative meetings twice a year. “This
proposal was also accepted by the social partners,” he
said. Mr Zarb said the GWU insisted that decisions in the Council
should be taken on a consensus basis between the social partners
but the government in its White Paper had indicated a majority
decision was preferable.
|
