Author: SME Chamber

The GRTU has this week conducted a find out amongst a sample of a variety of businesses that usually have their sale effected by purchases made during the festive season. GRTU is therefore able to provide you with a general comment of how business and Christmas shopping is at present. The businesses selected were from the following sectors: beverage distributors, household goods, confectionaries, footwear and clothing, hair and beauty salons, restaurants, jewelers and supermarkets.

The majority of those surveyed said that Christmas shopping caught up mostly after the feast of the 13^th and that the level of sales where similar to that of last year with very few saying the sales have increased and slightly more, even though still few, saying sales declined compared to last year. The businesses that saw their sales rise this year said they worked very hard with promotions and offers to boost their chances of succeeding this festive season.

The majority also said that this outcome was expected since Malta is not immune to the effects of the crises. A few did however expect better as they thought the worse of the crises was over and that consumer confidence would be reinstated, however recent negativism once again dwindled consumer confidence, and people are once again cautious to spend. This might have delayed Christmas shopping a little but businesses are confident they will see a boost in Christmas shopping in the coming days.

We saw a difference in the views of the businesses according to the localities in which they operate. The worst views came from shops operated in Valletta. Owners having shops in Valletta, Sliema, Iklin, Hamrun, Melliha, St Julians and other localities say that the sales registered in Valletta were very negative. Sales in Valletta have been declining but this year was an unbelievable record. Owners say that consumers are disincentivised by a number of factors all at once to enter Valletta, namely embellishment works, less and less parking, lack of confidence in public transport, etc…

What Saviour Balzan is trying to inflict using his self assumed power, as owner of a media stable and as a journalist who pretends to be more professional than all others, is going beyond any acceptable limit. It is character assassination of the Director General of GRTU and pure vitriol against GRTU. GRTU has been around for 65 years and has in the past suffered much more than Saviour Balzan and Roger Degiorgio's business venture can ever foment. In spite of what Saviour Balzan invents.

 GRTU is a healthy and well geared national organisation with a National Executive of 18 entrepreneurs from a varied list of enterprise owners, traders, retailers, service providers and other entrepreneurial sectors and an extremely well organised national organisation which is the pride of most of its more than 7000 business owners members.

The hype that Saviour Balzan and Malta Today keep repeating is that GRTU is only a one man affair backed by a triumvirate. This is hilarious and smacks of sheer ignorance, if not more. This hype is believed only by the desolate who has never set foot in the GRTU headquarters. The truth, visible to anyone really well versed and following no hidden agenda,  is that  in Malta no other national organisation representing business is so active on a day to day basis and  handles so many issues at EU, national, localities, sectoral and individual enterprise level, as does GRTU. All visitors to GRTU headquarters know that GRTU is one hub of regular activities on a daily basis. The team working at GRTU behind the Director General is not only professional and well trained but today they manage issues that the likes of Saviour Balzan cannot even start to fathom. The truth is that for people like Saviour Balzan what matters is what appears to their blinkered vision and not what really goes on in the wider world of business. Like the confessor they only hear sinners and live in a world of make believe.   

GRTU under the direction of Vince Farrugia has been transformed over the years from an organisation that simply  pushes forward the complaints of its members and agitates for the authorities to seek solutions, a state in which other organisations unfortunately still reign, to a modern organisation that not only represents and hears the complaints of an ever growing membership spread among all of Malta's micro, small and medium enterprise sectors but succeeds to formulate policies and strategies and recommend solutions to the authorities that best improve the role of micro and small  and medium enterprises and help strengthen the overall performance of the Maltese economy within an EU economic and social framework. Saviour Balzan has a poor idea of GRTU. It is not the same judgement of the EU Commission, of our partners in UEAPME and Normapme and EuroCommerce, all leading Pan European organisation in which GRTU is very active. They consider GRTU as one of the national representative bodies amongst all the EU27 that is most highly well prepared on all issues effecting European SMEs whether from a commercial, fiscal, economic, employment or legislative point of view.

The volume of work and papers and opinions that GRTU produces give credit to a team of professionals at the GRTU head office. GRTU is recognised by all Ministers and Authorities in Malta as well organised and prepared and active with extremely well produced strategies and proposals. GRTU today, through the strong representation of Vince Farrugia as Maltese Employers representative at the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the excellent work done at the EESC by his predecessor, ex-assistant to the Director General, Ms Sylvia Gauci, has a standing with the EU Commission, and with a wide cross section of leading organisations from the EU 27 represented at EESC, unmatched by any other civil society active organisation in Malta. The GRTU NewSTRING that every week succeeds to report only the essential points of what GRTU works on week in week out, shows to all who genuinely care, what GRTU does.

Of course however, for Saviour Balzan and Media Today, all this is not important. All that matters to Saviour Balzan is to keep repeating and exaggerating the conspiracy theory designed by the well paid criminal defence lawyer Dr Manuel Mallia in his defence of Sandro Chetcuti. What Sandro Chetcuti did on 11.03.09 is well documented. The report of the Police and of the Hospital Emergency personnel and other medical and eye witness reports establish clearly why the Attorney General decided to proceed with an attempted murder charge and a charge of grievous bodily harm against Sandro Chetcuti. What Dr Anthony Samuel, Malta's foremost expert on Imagery, produced in Court is objective, electronically registered bone scan evidence which is irrefutable as to the damage caused on Vince Farrugia by the savage attack of Sandro Chetcuti.

When Vince Farrugia's medical consultant, who is also his daughter, stated that a scan is good for the Court case, she said so because a scan is irrefutable, scientific and not opinionated evidence, something on which the court can rely.  She was stating the obvious – a scan shows whether any damage was inflicted, good for the prosecution, or not inflicted, good for the defence. Any consultant would have recommended the same whether the patient was her/his father or not. and in this case it was obviously necessary as contrary to what the defence in court is trying to insinuate and what Saviour Balzan appears to take as fact, Vince Farrugia had never before of 11.03.09 reported or exhibited any pains in the ribs or suffered any accident that could have cause breakages to the ribs as VF himself confirmed under ought in Court. The scan became a necessity after Vince Farrugia was released from Hospital still suffering the same severe pains in his ribs that he felt, as witness by all at GRTU on 11.03.09, immediately after the assault by Sandro Chetcuti. The cause of the pains did not show up on X-ray and any consultant would have given the same advice to any patient in similar circumstances. Any Consultant would also have contacted the Head of the Imagery Department at Mater Dei to see if an early appointment was possible. Anyone of the hospital staff would have sought to send a message, one way or another, if an appointed slot was possible. Whether the message went direct to the patient or indirectly through his son is really irrelevant.

Of Course the Defence in search of a way out of the concrete evidence of all who witness the assault and who heard Sandro Chetcuti scream "noqtlok, noqtlok" – ("I'll kill you, I'll kill you") and, again after he was pulled off Vince Farrugia as he punched and kicked in clear intent to perform what he intended to execute, he screamed, as evidenced in Court "I'll be back with my brother (a night club bouncer) to finish you off". Any serious and well intended journalist would have seen all the evidence and sought to be objective in any comments and not pretend to be gullible enough to accept what the defence of the accused tries to project irrespective of the added harm to the victim of the assault. He is free to swallow the conspiracy theory line, hook and sinker but at least he should have also referred to the other stated sworn evidence by witnesses and scene of crime Police. Saviour Balzan should have also noted what one of the witnesses said in Court. That Sandro Chetcuti told this witness, before he Sandro Chetcuti even went to meet Vince Farrugia at his Office, "Today I'll do him in", referring most clearly to the Director General. That's for intent.

The Defence lawyer has a duty to seek to defend Sandro Chetcuti from an accusation that could land his client many years in prison. It is however strange indeed that Saviour Balzan and Media Today is defending an aggressor with a history of violence on persons (at least one recorded at Rabat and another at the MEPA buildings) and who publicises himself as a land speculator and who is a self-confessed and registered heavy tax evader and who in the not so distant past has been shown by Malta Today itself as a person very scarce on business ethics as a property dealer. All this in a pathetic campaign to denigrate the Director General of GRTU, GRTU as an organisation and to character assassinate not only Vince Farrugia but also Malta's most qualified professional in his field of medical speciality, consultant Dr Anthony Samuel. Anyone at GRTU has the right to ask why Saviour Balzan and Media Today have appointed themselves as super defenders of the accused and are in the field to denigrate the victim of the violent attack even before a Court Judgement is delivered.

The good news today for all of us who hold GRTU in great esteem is that Vince Farrugia is in good health and GRTU members are proud to have him back in full vigour.  The good news also for GRTU is that as a result of  the tremendous work, enthusiasm  and energy that Vince Farrugia places in all that he does for micro, small and medium Maltese enterprises with  the full and constant support of the elected President, Officers and National Executive of GRTU, as well as the work and support of the more than 60 Section and Special Committees active in GRTU, and above all with the professional and hard work of the excellent team employed by GRTU, Malta's National Chamber of SMEs, GRTU, in 2011 had the best year since 1995.

DURING 2011 GRTU RECRUITED 1400 NEW MEMBERS. SINCE 2009 MORE THAN 2000 NEW MEMBERS JOINED GRTU. AND GRTU LOOKS TOWARDS 2012 WITH INCREASED VIGOUR.

Damning report published by the European Court of Auditors. – The European Fisheries Fund (EFF) has largely failed in its objective to reduce the overcapacity of the EU's fishing fleets, according to a damning report from the European Court of Auditors .

 

The EFF's ban on direct funding for building new fishing vessels was largely undermined by funding for technical improvements that increased the capacity of existing ships, the report observes. Subsidies for decommissioning ships failed, with less than a quarter of the allotted aid being used. Those vessels for which subsidies were paid out were mostly old and inactive. Europe's fishing fleet is still estimated to be two to three times the size appropriate for sustainable fishing levels.

Having been given advance notice of the auditors' criticisms, the European Commission presented a proposal to reform the fund for the next multiannual funding period (MFF), 2014-20. The €6.5 billion ‘Maritime and Fisheries Fund' is the final element of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) reform package, and seeks to address declining fish stocks better than its predecessor, which ends in 2013.

Acknowledging that funding for decommissioning ships has not worked, the Commission has proposed to end the practice. The proposal would block funding for technical improvements on ships that are part of oversized fleets, but other ships could still get money for improvements. New funds will also go toward building facilities at ports to make the best use of unwanted catches that would otherwise be discarded.

Funding will also be used to promote income diversification for fishermen to encourage them to engage in other activities. Funding would be conditional on the compliance of member states and operators with the reformed CFP. Fishermen who break the rules could be made to repay aid.

Campaign groups, including Greenpeace, have welcomed elements of the proposal, but have concerns that it leaves the existing subsidy regime largely intact – with the EU remaining one of the world's top three subsidisers of the fisheries sector.

They are also worried about a proposed extension of funding to the growing aquaculture sector.

Markus Knigge of the Pew Environment Group said that continued funding for ship improvements will mean more egregious examples of counterproductive spending. "Between 2000 and 2008, for example, the EU provided €33.5 million in financial aid for the modernisation of bluefin tuna fishing vessels, which target a species that is so overfished it is classified as endangered," he said.

The European Parliament, given increased powers over fisheries under the Lisbon treaty, will vote on the proposal in the second half of 2012. MEPs hope to secure agreement with member states in early 2013. The Commission will present the proposal to national agriculture and fisheries ministers when they meet next week (15-16 December).

Battle over fish quota

The ministers will be engaged in their annual tussle over fishing quotas, haggling over fishing quotas for the North Sea, the Atlantic Ocean and the Black Sea. Quotas for the Baltic Sea were agreed in October. The ministers are also expected to approve a deal agreed on Monday (5 December) with Norway on shared fish stocks in the North Sea. This would introduce a ban on discards in the Skagerrak Strait between Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

The Commission proposed quotas to ensure sustainable fish stocks in November. But some member states may resist a proposed 15%-25% cut in the quotas for all fish stocks where traditional scientific information on sustainability is not available. WWF, a campaign group, said a blanket cut would undermine the CFP reform proposal's emphasis on increasing regional control of fisheries.

The ministers are also expected to authorise three new varieties of genetically modified crops in Europe by deciding not to object to the Commission's proposal.

Aim is to avoid confused national response  – The European Commission has adopted measures to co-ordinate the European response to health crises such as the 2009 swine-flu pandemic (H1N1). The goal is to avoid a repetition of the confused response that saw some member states – notably France – buy far too much medicine, while others – such as Poland – purchased none. The Commission wants to strengthen the hands of smaller member states in negotiations with the pharmaceutical companies that make the vaccines.

Under the proposal member states would be able to buy such medicines as Tamiflu jointly, with the Commission negotiating on their behalf. The member states would then decide how much medicine was allotted to each country.

"We went through a process of learning the lessons from the H1N1 event, and we detected flaws in communication and in the vaccine procurement process," John Dalli, the European commissioner for health, told European Voice. "The pharmaceutical industry imposed certain conditions on member states because they had their backs to the wall."

Voluntary pooling

The negotiation-pooling would be voluntary, and would be likely to benefit specifically small member states or member states that do not have a large domestic pharmaceutical industry. It would increase their negotiating power and allow them to ensure that each country received the appropriate amount of medicine.

Such a negotiation would be triggered once the Commission declared a public health emergency, another new element to the proposal. Approval of new vaccines would then be fast-tracked, taking two to three months instead of the normal seven.

Under the existing system, the EU can only call a health emergency once it has been declared by the World Health Organization (WHO). But the WHO only declares a pandemic once it has spread to at least two continents, so an outbreak occurring only in Europe would not qualify.

A member state would still be free to purchase no medicine if it so wished – unless by doing so it would jeopardise the health of Europe as a whole. The proposal would also allow the Commission to enforce cross-border action if a member state failed to take appropriate measures or was overwhelmed. "We are only as strong as our weakest link," said Dalli. "Diseases do not respect borders. We need to make sure that the non-compliance of one member state does not affect the whole."

The Commission would have the power to impose penalties on member states that failed to take action to combat a pandemic. In emergency situations where people were dying in large numbers and national measures were proving insufficient, the Commission would be able to introduce cross-border measures such as the quarantine and screening of infected citizens.

The proposal will need to be approved by member states and MEPs. During the 2009 swine flu outbreak, the Commission offered to provide response co-ordination, but member states rejected that offer. National capitals have since warmed to the idea, once it became clear that they had made mistakes in their 2009 medicine purchases.

Last year health ministers asked the Commission to improve co-ordination, and the Parliament expressed the same desire in a resolution earlier this year. But there may be some resistance among member states to the Commission designating itself as the body that decides when to declare a pandemic, rather than the Council.

Quality and safety liability

Michèle Rivasi, a French Green MEP who prepared a report on the issue for the European Parliament, said group purchasing of vaccines was a good idea, "provided that the manufacturers remain liable for the quality, safety and efficacy of their products." She added: "Under no circumstances must governments be made liable for side-effects of vaccines that are supposed to be safe."

The proposal would also tighten up existing response mechanisms. It will extend the existing Early Warning and Response System for communicable diseases created in 1998 to all health threats – including those from biological, chemical or environmental causes. It will also formalise the informal Health Security Committee created by health ministers in 2001 after the anthrax incidents in the United States. Member states would also have to prepare national response plans.

The European Ombudsman, P. Nikiforos Diamandouros, received a positive reply from the EU institutions in 78% of cases where he issued critical remarks and made suggestions for improvement in 2010. He remained concerned, however, about the high number of unsatisfactory follow-up replies (10 out of 33) which the European Commission provided in response to his critical remarks. In total, he issued 38 critical remarks to the EU institutions, including the Commission, the European Parliament, and other EU agencies and bodies. On the other hand, the Ombudsman also identified seven "star cases" in which the follow-up to his remarks was exemplary. These are among the results of a new study on the follow-up given by the EU administration to the Ombudsman's critical and further remarks for the year 2010.

In 2010, the Ombudsman's critical and further remarks concerned matters such as unjustified refusal to give access to documents, problems with tender procedures, and infringement of the right to be heard. A further remark differs from a critical remark in that it is not based on a finding of maladministration. In 2010, the Ombudsman issued a total of 21 further remarks (20 of which led to positive replies). Both types of remark aim to help the EU administration to improve its services.

Constructive responses to cases concerning calls for tenders

In his previous follow-up report, the Ombudsman had criticised the institutions' defensive approach when it came to cases concerning calls for tenders regarding EU programmes and projects. This year's report, on the other hand, contains highly constructive responses to such cases.

One of the "star cases" concerned a complaint from a Belgian company, which lost a Commission tender in the field of European aid for Bulgaria and Romania. Following a critical remark, the Commission reconsidered its initial position and implemented the Ombudsman's proposal to launch a new tender procedure.

In his study, the Ombudsman also stressed that he would monitor the way the Commission deals with sub-contractors to ensure that their fundamental right to good administration is respected.

Commission's failure to give access to documents on car emissions

One of the unsatisfactory replies concerned the Commission's refusal to give full access to briefings prepared for a Commissioner in the framework of a proposal to reduce CO₂ emissions from passenger cars. Another involved the European Parliament's failure to follow-up constructively in a case concerning the double dependent child allowance for an official's severely disabled child.

The full follow-up report is available at: http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/followups.faces

The European Commission is asking the National co-ordinators for the SME Week to nominate an entrepreneur who will be included in the SME Week 2012 edition of the brochure "The Secret of Success". The Commission will use the brochure to highlight both the challenges and the excitement of entrepreneurship as a career choice and thus encourage the general public to consider being self-employed as a real and attractive career option.

 

For the 2012 edition the theme will be "European SMEs as International Champions". The Commission is working to establish a more coherent and effective EU strategy for supporting SMEs in international markets. Currently only 25% of EU SMEs are internationally active outside their home country through trade, investment or other forms of cooperation with foreign partners and only 13% venture in one of the mentioned forms outside the EU Single Market.

To demonstrate that size is not an obstacle, the SMEs can successfully compete internationally and thus to promote international activities of SMEs, the 2012 brochure will highlight entrepreneurs who are successful in exporting their products and/or services. The achievements of these EU international champions shall provide valuable lessons and inspiration for other SMEs. Furthermore, telling fascinating stories of how they have made their business successful should serve as stimulation and role model for other European citizens aspiring to become entrepreneurs.

We therefore ask you to contact Abigail Psaila at the GRTU in order to apply if you feel you fit in the criteria proposed by the Commission.

Malta's 2012 Budget, recently announced by the Minister of Finance, launched a temporary VAT amnesty providing for a remission of interest and administrative penalties for registered persons who have an outstanding balance under the 1994 VAT Act, Customs and Excise Tax Act or the 1998 VAT Act. The arrangement is open to Malta VAT registered persons who have failed to submit the necessary VAT returns (or VAT declarations) falling due up to the 15 October 2011 and/or have balances due to the VAT Department under any of the abovementioned Acts as at 15 October 2011.

Requirements for Eligibility

A person registered under article 10 of the VAT Act would be eligible for the scheme where he:

1. Has arrears due on returns for periods whose returns were due on or prior to 15 October 2011;

2. Has submitted all VAT returns which were due on or prior to 15 October 2011 by not later than 15 January 2012;

3. Submits on time and with full payment (if any) all VAT returns falling due on and after 15 November 2011 (an unofficial extension of one month has been granted with respect to VAT returns that were due to be filed by the 15 November 2011);

4.  Withdraws all appeals lodged before the VAT Appeals Board, the Administrative Law Tribunal or the Court of Appeal by 15 January 2012;

5. Submits payments by the dates indicated in the amnesty agreement (refer to Table 1):

The percentage by which the interest and administrative penalties will be decreased is determined by the option taken by the VAT registered person either to pay all the VAT and reduced interest and penalties by 15 March 2012 or pay the amounts due over a period of time between March 2012 and February 2013 as per Table 1 below.

 

 

 

Where the balance due to the VAT Department is equal to or greater than the total interest and administrative penalties due, the percentage reduction is calculated on the interest and administrative penalties only. However, where the balance due is less than the total interest and administrative penalties due, the percentage reduction is calculated on the balance due.

Numerical Example 1

Total outstanding balance due is €15,000

Total interest and administrative penalties accrued is €10,000

In this case the total outstanding balance is more than the total interest and administrative penalties accrued and the remission will affect the €10,000 interest and administrative penalties as follows: Table 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

Numerical Example 2

Total outstanding balance due is €5,000

Total interest and administrative penalties accrued is €10,000

 

 

In this case the total outstanding balance is less than the total interest and administrative penalties accrued and the remission will affect the €5,000 balance due as follows:

Table 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A person registered under article 11 or 12 of the VAT Act would be eligible for the scheme where he:

1. Submits all pending declarations/notices by 15 January 2012;

2. Pays €10 in respect of each default by 15 January 2012

Importantly, in all the above cases: The remission shall only have effect in the account of the registered person once final payment in accordance with the amnesty agreement is effected to the satisfaction of the VAT Department;

Where the registered person complies with the relevant conditions of the amnesty all interest that may accrue during the repayment period will be remitted;

The amnesty does not entitle a registered person to make a claim for a refund in respect of interest and penalties already paid;

If interest is remitted under the scheme, the VAT Department reserves the right to deduct the interest so remitted from any interest payable to that person on VAT refunds due to him in the next six years that are not paid by the due date.

Info from Deloitte

Why did you become an entrepreneur? I had so many new ideas that the only way I could bring them to life was by setting up my own business.

How have you come to chose your line of business?Since childhood I wanted to somehow work in mass communications. I always felt I had a "special gift" for creativity and this line of work.

Where did you go on your last holiday?

Apart from work related travel, the last real holiday with my family was to Dubai

What is your earliest memory?

Crying my eyes out to avoid going on the bus to school with the sister that I was terrorized of (she was probably a very nice person).

If you could chose to be someone famous who would you be?

There are many famous people I admire but none that I would want to be as such.

Following Government's decision to carry out works under a Ten T Project in Triq Dicembru 13 to Menqa Roundabout Marsa, GRTU had discussed with Transport Malta the phasing and traffic management and had made a number of requests for improvement such as the initiation of works after the festive season, therefore later than originally planned.

 

 

 

 

 

GRTU is now pleased to inform that we received communication from Transport Malta that following in depth consideration of GRTU's concerns the programme of works were revised accordingly.

The works will be concentrated in Spencer Garden area and along the Triq Salib Tal-Marsa between Triq is-Sajjieda and Bridgestone within the pavement and parking area only. The works in Triq is-Salib tal-Marsa and Triq Patri Felicjan Billocca from area infront of church, junction with Triq Balbi and up to Triq is-Sajjieda will commence on 2^nd January 2012. As from this date access will only be limited for vehicles to render a service and some parking will be lost.

Transport Malta assured the GRTU that it will be doing its utmost to minimise the inconvenience but due to the nature of works (deep trenches) and for safety reasons access will be denied during certain times when they will be proceeding with works.

Transport Malta thanked the GRTU for the strong cooperation we always show and stated that they are always available for any clarification requested.