The Budget is approaching and our developers section led by section president Sandro Chetcuti presented their elaborate paper this morning during a press conference.
The GRTU, through surveys amongst its members, notes that the current situation in the development industry exhibits oversupply in residential components for first time buyers, Stringent banking conditions and indecision by prospective buyers although market correction is taking place.
Recommendations to Avoid Hard Landing
Given the available housing stock Government should grab the opportunity to redirect public money (approximately Lm9 million) envisaged for the construction of 300 odd social housing units to more appropriately targeted incentives.
Allocate funds for the introduction of the pre-electoral promise re: shared ownership scheme.
Incentivise the rental and emphyteutical concessions by introducing a flat tax rate to owners.
Incentivise the rental and emphyteutical concessions by introducing tax credits to first time buyers for a given number of years.
Extend the 5 year option granted on final withholding tax to 8 years. This is intended to save substantial numbers of developers from a serious credit crunch.
Elimination of double taxation in connection with final withholding tax on VAT payments.
Final withholding or capital gains should be paid on the real selling price ad not subject to Government's architects' valuation.
Set up task force made up of the relevant stakeholders to examine practical ways of addressing excess supply of housing units through the introduction of mixed use zoning given the current demand for commercial/office uses.
Tap the buoyant tourism market to promote the investment of foreign money in targeted areas of housing surplus.
In view of the Energy Directive, the Government should set up a fund to aid stakeholders in its implementation.
To tackle indecision by prospective buyers, GRTU strongly recommends a 6 month moratorium on the payment of stamp duty on property purchased by first time buyers.
The detailed proposal is on GRTU' website: www.grtu.org.mt. Meanwhile we encourage our member's comments on the issue.
GRTU this morning, as was promised yesterday by the Director General Vincent Farrugia on Bondi+, published its proposals on Government's Utility Rate Tariffs.
As you are all aware as a member of MCESD GRTU together with the other social partners slammed the proposal and refused to accept Government's consultation method on the issue and the timelines of the implementation of these new tariffs.
This is a story being retold. GRTU never agreed with the surcharge when it was introduced. The surcharge system was constructed by authorities and social partners were once again introduced too late in the game.
This time however GRTU was rightly blamed for the removal of the capping system which benefited only between 78 and 120 companies. The amount that was not paid by the industry due to the capping system was then spread on the rest of the population. This constituted 10% from the 95% surcharge that was being paid by citizens and the rest of the businesses.
This was grossly discriminating and GRTU appealed to the Commission and filed a petition with the Parliament's Petition Committee. This was done with the knowledge that the capping system devised by Government was against EU law and was discriminating in the regards of the businesses GRTU represents and the citizens at large who had to pay to make up for this. >> P.2
GRTU understands the importance to safeguard the jobs these companies hold. Capping is not the answer in the same way giving absolutely no aid is. The capping system did nothing to encourage industry to move toward energy efficiency. Government has to offer industry an alternative and start auditing their consumption one by one.
For these principles GRTU was in favour of EU membership. The European Union establishes an imposition on Member States to make a timely and transparent consultation procedure. This was absolutely not present and the consultation procedure being carried out is unrealistic.
GRTU is also pro Europe's competition policy. Malta is unlucky compared to the other Member States as we have a state monopoly supplying water and electricity. To make matters even worse the regulator is absent. The regulator is there to protect the citizens and his functions are fundamental to avoid abuse. GRTU wanted to see tariffs issued by the regulator and placed on their website for proper public consultation. The accountants should have been appointed by the regulator.
Inefficiencies in Enemalta should have diminished but instead they went up by 35%, this was confirmed by the KPMG. We are paying higher rates not only due to international affairs but also due to the management inefficiencies in Enemalta.
GRTU cannot agree with the tariff system being proposed as we believe it should not be based on a specific period-last September as KPMG suggested but on a secular basis.
In addition GRTU demands a choice of tariffs for consumers. There should be at least 3 choices- one for peak, an intermediary and another for the night hours.
We ask how can Government come up with tariffs without knowing what is being consumed. GRTU at the end of 2007 had applied for structural funds with a proposal to evaluate the energy consumption in Valletta of each household and establishment. Through energy audits a strategy would have been constructed to diminish the consumption as well as the bills. This project was unfortunately killed by bureaucracy.
The amount that Government wants to collect includes running expenses, investment and return. Economically speaking this is correct but the collection has to be done on a longer term. Malta has no energy efficiency plan and Enemalta must start planning on a long term. The recovery planned must however be diminished and no company recovers such an investment within the same year.
GRTU asks government to halt this proposal on utility tariffs. This until a proper discussion is held, it is high time that a debate is held and the public wants it.
GRTU has several other proposals including electronic billing with discount factors, real rebates up to 70%, energy audits, energy efficiency campaigns, rental fee on the water meter to be removed and a reasonable amount of time for the MCESD partners to send their proposals.
The full proposals are available on GRTU's website: www.grtu.org.mt. Meanwhile we encourage our member's comments on the issue.
The European Parliament's Petitions Committee and Simon Busuttil MEP organised a workshop on "Combating misleading business directories" in Brussels on 11 September.
Many enterprises, often small traders, fall victim to scams operated through misleading advertising and unwillingly sign up to an insertion into a business directory after having been led to believe that this would be free of charge – while in fact it is not.
UEAPME Enterprise Policy Director Luc Hendrickx was among the speakers at the event. Misleading directory companies have been a well-known reality since the 1960s among UEAPME members. It is now time for the authorities to take the problem seriously and enforce the existing laws. This type of scam must be considered as serious fraud and as a priority by public prosecutors, said Mr Hendrickx.
A cross-border EU point of contact between the administrative and judicial authorities must also be created to facilitate the exchange of information. Moreover, financial support should be given to organisations helping scam victims, and a blacklist should be established to gather data on scam companies.
As the Information and Communication Technologies Policy Support Programme (ICT-PSP) and the Eco-innovationprogramme have just closed their 2008 Call for applications, the CIPMalta National Contact Point is endeavouring to compile some statistics on the Maltese participation in these Calls. Thus, it would be greatly appreciated if you could let them know if you submitted application(s) to participate (as coordinator or partner) in any proposed ICTPSP or Eco-innovation projects.
In the affirmative case, it would be useful if you can provide them with the title, addressed objective, your position in the consortium and preferably also a brief outline of the respective project proposals. The information that you'll provide is confidential and will be used only for the compilation of the mentioned statistics.
This would allow CIPMalta to better assess the ability of the Maltese entities to tap into the mentioned EU funding programmes, seek way to address any constrains and barriers to this end, advocate for any required programme fine-tuning at EC level and further assist you as necessary.
These may be sent to the Malta Investment Management Co. Ltd. (MIMCOL),Enterprise Centre, San Gwann Industrial Estate, San Gwann SGN09 – Malta
On behalf of the clients: Enemalta Corporation – Water Services Corporation
The analysis is based on the figures provided and no verification of the said figures has been made. We accordingly hold no responsibility for any further figures issued on the basis of these figures. We have tried to provide a constructive approach together with a mitigation plan , once again based on the figures provided at this stage
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
Introduction
The Corporations themselves set the terms of reference and are the final payers of the study presented by KPMG. In itself this creates a conflict of interest vis a vis the end user of their services. This matter should have been overseen by the Regulator, the Malta Resources Authority, at all its stages.
Any changes in tariff price structures by these Corporations need the end approval of the Malta Resources Authority as the Regulator.
Terms of Reference provided to KPMG
They did not include for a socio economic impact and neither a mitigation plan. They are also based on total recovery of costs and also future investment totaling 450.6 million between 2008 and 2012.
1. Figures have not been verified in any manner and some basic figures are totally lacking in order to make a direct comparison.
2. Discussions /meeting were held only with Corporations themselves and Government Entities (entities not specified). No meetings were held with stakeholder and as a result no mitigation plan was done or foreseen.
The EU Market
The market is now liberalized across The EU in respect to Energy . Figures in Italy alone show a decrease of 27% in the last calendar year despite the increase of oil price. An EU citizen living in Malta is disadvantaged, due to lack of the competitive ability to source his energy resource as has now become normal practice across the EU.
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
The lack of initiatives not taken in the past in respect to alternative energies by irresponsible authorities now has to be forked out by the public, trade, commerce, industry and the entertainment and hospitality, industry at large and especially small enterprises.
The introduction of the surcharge was outlined by Government at earlier stages to be a temporary one. Enemalta and Water Services Corporation are now removing this concept completely and including this as part of a standard tariff procedure.
Figures in short :
Total Costs Enemalta 365,392,594
This includes :
Return on Capital Employed 22,431,623
GRTU recommends that this figure is not to be included in recovery of costs at this stage, thus allowing a direct reduction of approx 6% as tariffs as proposed by KPMG.
Revenue to be based on 342,960,971
Revenue to be based on this figure when this figure is audited to be correct.
No of Accounts Households 209,048
No of Accounts Non residential 41,855
Households
Domestic up to 3000units Users 117003 Increase over 100%
Over 3000 to 20,000 units Users 92045 Increase 28%to 40%
To be noted is the fact that these figures are given as average and as such these could end up to be misleading from many aspects.
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
Current revenue for variable receipts is not identified in the report.
Target Revenue for Residential/Households
Installations projected 2,758,365
Fixed (meter rent) 17,918,400
Variable ( units) 126,658,927
Total 147,335,692
The options provided by KPMG are no different, the base rate of each unit increases where Eco Rebates are being recommended, but the cumulative revenue by the Corporation remains neutral. (pg96/97)
Option 2 would be best suited for Residential if the figures given are correct.
Domestic Tariffs The way forward
The way forward is based on the acceptance of the "Pay as you use principle" However it is to be noted that Malta currently lacks the infrastructure to allow its EU citizens the right to choose their energy supplier so this has to be considered when final tariffs are issued and agreed to.
GRTU recommends the following for Domestic Tariffs :
Two basis of tariffs
a) A guaranteed price option for a minimal of 365 days. This will
place users on a safer ground and they could plan at least for
a calendar year. Whilst Enemalta has a right to hedge and
dictate its basis for a long term, then the citizen should also
the same right.
This is a greater need in Malta where the EU Citizen does not
Have access to the competitive market.
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
b) Alternative Multitier option with introduction of Peak hour Use,
Intermediate and Off Peak metering.
2) Introduction of Electronic Payments against a discounted facility
Electronic bill sending also to be introduced thus reducing costs and also become more environment sensitive.
3) Introduction of Rebates on Installation of Solar Heaters and
Photovoltaic Panels, with rebates covering minimally 70% of outlayed capital. Rebate to be given 50% through billing structure
Over 365 days and 50% in payment.
These rebates should be recovered through Schemes which were earmarked for use by MRA in their plan set out for Malta in respect to Renewable Energy Initiatives provided to the Commission in October 2007 and approved.
4) The establishment of a threshold for households depending on the
Individuals in the home. Tariffs are to be structured on this basis so that we primarily opt to conserve energy use. We need to make sure that use of electricity in units does not surpass a basis year 2005.
5) Conserving the use of energy is vital in making sure the above
is reached and that is why Energy Audits should be a must in households , certified by an Engineer. Energy Audited residences
should be given 50% of the cost of the audit in payment terms.
6) The introduction by Enemalta of a loyalty card for those who
Use less then their established bench mark. The loyalty card would include a point structure that can be utilized by the end user for purchases from "Enemalta Major Partners"
Major partners would include providers of services or products.
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
The Non Residential Sector
Enemalta are expecting an income of CircaEuros 217,731,926 from this category of customers. There are 41, 855 users in this category.
The Schedule below shows the average amount of Kwh used , their current average payment, their projected increase in monetary terms and percentage and the amount of users in this category.
.
Kwh
Current
Projected
Percentage
Daily
Projected
Users
Increase
Increase
Cost (C)
Daily C
-4000
357
403
Over 100%
0.98
2.08
4k-8k
1028
428
41%
2.82
3.99
8k-12k
1699
465
27%
4.65
5.93
12-20k
2705
539
19.9%
7.42
8.88
36874
20-40k
4712
593
12.5%
12.90
14.53
2349
40-60k
8165
862
10.5%
22.36
24.73
906
60-80k
11605
1237
10.6%
31.79
35.18
474
80-100
14797
1585
10.7%
40.53
44.88
232
100/200
22932
2217
9.7%
62.82
68.90
489
200/400
47423
3867
8.1%
129.92
140.52
247
400/600
83130
6273
7.5%
227.75
244.93
107
600/800
119163
8701
7.3%
326.47
350.30
52
800/1m
150798
10832
7.1%
413.14
442.82
22
1m-5m
297527
15301
5%
815
857
82
5m-10m
1004400
33427
3.3%
2751
2843
14
Ov 10m
1971926
47684
2.4%
5402
5533
7
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
Notes to the above Schedule
The amounts given are in Euros.
It is not known whether the 120 capped industry / hotels are reflected in this report from an income point of view.
KVah units only affect 142 customers beyond 80-100k bracket.
The report does not include a breakdown of users below 20,000units
Capping
Whilst it is understood that capping is both not environmentally friendly and discriminatory, the report does not outline the total value in monetary terms that has been capped and thus paid by other commercial sector and industry. A report yesterday quoted as the surcharge level decreasing to 75% instead of present 95% if this capping was not in force.
Meter Rent
Three Phase
The meter rent now increased from Euros 55.90 to Euros 420 (4200accounts) thus increasing rent by 1 Euro per day.
Single Phase
The meter rent now increased from Euros 55.90 to Euros 420
(37,797 accounts) thus increasing rent by 1 Euro a day.
Mitigation Proposals
The costs are to be based on 6% less then the projected income of Euro 217 million. The Economy is currently not to include a 6% return on investment. Thus this would reduce recovery costs to App Euro 204 million.
Unlike other countries the commercial sector does not have an option of choice. The brunt of the current situation should not be borne solely by the Non Residential users. It has been the responsibility of government through its Energy Corporation Enemalta to live up to its responsibility of providing a service at par with its EU counterparts Non residential customers in the EU have a choice.
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
The proposal here includes a total alignment to EU Directives but on the other side the public and the non residential sector is being deprived of its right to a liberalized market.
While Subsidies on Electricity and Water are not acceptable, there are no rules against providing funds from other sources in astructured manner through Eco driven incentives to make sure that users can meet their obligations , by actually paying the said billing.
Mitigation Initiatives for Industry/ Commerce/ Hotels/ Non residential
Bench Mark use of these services at basis year 2005.
Audits to be made by certified engineers and payment for audit to be given in credits to all above sectors.
A rebate mechanism of up to a maximum of 70% on installations of Photovoltaics and also solar energy. Other renewable energy sources to be considered according to the related sector.
This rebate is to be given back 50% by deduction in billing and 50% by payment.
Once again MRA has approved Schemes under EU funding , to provide for these payments.
Non residential accounts to have a voluntary Euro 20 addition to
Their annual billing with a view of using these funds to provide Eco Driven initiatives to the same non industrial sector.
MEPA to undertake that all buildings over 1000sq metres are to
Minimally meet the Energy Efficiency in Buildings Directive ,and further to be energy sufficient in their needs. This would mean having providers to the grid instead of the other way round.
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
The removal of the capping will without fail have an impact on
These 120 companies/ hotels. GRTU recommends that these are Energy Audited with immediate effect and recommendations are made before end of this calendar year. The costof these recommendations are to be studied by Enemalta and a structured rebate system over 10 years is to be agreed to with these industries.
Enemalta to enter into agreements with Alternative Energy
Suppliers through a tendering process. These agreements would include price structures for products to be made available to the non residential sector at preferred rates. This would thus reduce the possibility of individual buying procedures.
Enemalta should also offer a standard choice rate of tariffs and a
Multi tier choice of tariffs to Non residential Sector . Bench Marks should be based on 2005 annual consumption
GRTU
ANALYSIS OF UTILITY RATE TARIFFS
"because we deserve better"
WATER TARIFFS
On the basis of the Electricity Report this study is also based on figures that have not been verified and further more this study should have been done by the Regulator and not by the Water Services Corporation. This any resulting information produced in this recommendation are deemed to be discriminatory in nature.
Water Cost 20,000,000 cbm @Euro .934
Total Recovery Projected by WSC : Euros 50,787,633.
Recovery includes 11.11 million for future investments (target 7.945 return on current capital employed) thus 21.8 % of total projections.
Electricity Costs are only Euro 10.71 million thus 21% of total cost. To note is that there is also the return on investment which is not at present included in this sum.
In related terms the surcharge here should have been applied on this 21% percent factor only not on the whole billing.
Also to note is the increase in distribution costs by 71% from basis year 2006.
GRTU Recommendations for Pre-Budget Discussions 2009
Current Situation Affecting the Development Industry
The GRTU, through surveys amongst its members, notes that the current situation in the development industry exhibits areas of concern in spite of a healthy employment scenario and a buoyant, still fragile tourism industry. This scenario begs a concerted effort by all the stake holders involved. GRTU notes that the issues involved, although widespread, can be split into 3 main categories:
Oversupply in the residential component targeted for first time buyers
Stringent banking conditions
Indecision by prospective buyers although market correction is taking place
The Oversupply Issue
The current oversupply resulted from different factors:
Height relaxation and rezoning into higher densities by MEPA
Repatriation of money
Low interest rates
Entry into the property market by inexperienced developers (mainly attributed to forced bartering practice)
Stringent Banking Conditions
GRTU notes that the loaning situation vis-à-vis the local banks has drastically changed from a relaxed approach into a very cautious one contributing to a lower affordability across the board, also driven by high interest rates. This reflects the global turmoil in financial sectors.
Indecision by Prospective Buyers
GRTU notes that the downward market correction vis-à-vis property prices and Government indecision on electoral promises regarding housing still to be delivered is sending out wrong signals to prospective buyers who are playing the waiting game.
Recommendations to Avoid Hard Landing
Given the available housing stock Government should grab the opportunity to redirect public money (approximately Lm9 million) envisaged for the construction of 300 odd social housing units to more appropriately targeted incentives.
There is no need to invest more money in social housing. Currently there are
good prices on the market and their availability will continue for the next 3-5
years. If more money is invested on housing, this will continue to kill the
property market and create an economic crisis. In certain cases the prices given
by the Housing Authority are higher than those given by thee private sector.
Allocate funds for the introduction of the pre-electoral promise re: shared ownership scheme.
Government promised to give Lm10,000 per couple to first-time buyers and even though GRTU understands that financial problems may arise, money used for social housing can be redirected and used for this scheme. Boosting this scheme would result in increased sale of property, removal of stagnation and the end of apathy regarding the waiting game.
Incentivise the rental and emphyteutical concessions by introducing a flat tax rate to owners.
GRTU has been emphasizing the importance of this concession for a long time as it is the way forward for movement in the rental market. From studies carried out, there is lack of agreement in the Cabinet regarding this issue, from fear that there will be a precedent from revenue on income tax. Government must separate revenue on investment from revenue on income or trading. Revenue from property is revenue from investment and not trading.
Moreover, incentivise the rental and emphyteutical concessions by introducing tax credits to first time buyers for a given number of years.
Tax credits should be given to buyers who decide to rent property instead of buying it.
Extend the 5 year option granted on final withholding tax to 8 years. This is intended to save substantial numbers of developers from a serious credit crunch.
Pre-entering into EU there was a boom in property prices which affected prices in land. Although it was a good move to introduce a 12% final withholding, GRTU recommends that this flat rate should be reduced. For those who are paying 35% on a project revenue, we recommend an extension from 5 years to 8 years as the market is going through a deflation period so to avoid a credit crunch for a number of developers who acquired land at a very high price.
Elimination of double taxation in connection with final withholding tax on VAT payments.
Developers pay VAT on furnishings and improvements and another 12% on them when selling. This double taxation is unfair and should be removed, in accordance with European Law.
Final withholding or capital gains should be paid on the real selling price ad not subject to Government's architects' valuation.
GRTU notes that architects representing the CIR are sometimes inflating the market, with buyers receiving unnecessary fines. In many circumstances, the vendor is forced to sell, sometimes due to pressures form the bank, and has to do so according to prices dictated by the market. Until a solution is discussed between GRTU and the Department, the final price should be that declared in the contract, especially if the convenjum is registered beforehand. This should only apply to capital gains tax and not the stamp duty. For example, why does a person who needs to sell at under market value (very subjective) have to be fined when making a bad deal? We understand that the purchaser who is making a good deal should pay the difference on stamp duty but definitely regrets to agree that a seller will be fined when he is forced to sell at a buyer's market price
Set up task force made up of the relevant stakeholders to examine practical ways of addressing excess supply of housing units through the introduction of mixed use zoning given the current demand for commercial/office uses.
There is a real demand for property, which is not a nuisance to neighbouring residents, such as offices, small showrooms and other commercial premises that need not be in main roads and which cannot obtain necessary permits due to restricted residential zones. GRTU realizes that there is a large supply of property in residential areas and recommends that Government or the Cabinet to issue a legal notice in this budget to permit commercial operations to run from these premises (but not industrial operations). This would also stimulate the economy in the property industry.
Tap the buoyant tourism market to promote the investment of foreign money in targeted areas of housing surplus.
Until now it seems that attraction from foreign investment has taken place in designated areas. GRTU believes that there is the possibility of sale of property in many more areas around the island and there should be good marketing in this regard.
In view of the Energy Directive, the Government should set up a fund to aid stakeholders in its implementation.
Until now, competent authorities including architects, engineers and MEPA have not yet shown clear guidelines what are the necessary requirements regarding Energy Directive imposed on new structures. Developers are still building according to the technology and structure of the architect, in conformity with MEPA. It appears prima facie that certain requirements cannot be met let alone be implemented. This is why, regarding the Energy Directive issue, there should be a greater effort for full coordination so that everyone can understand exactly what this Energy Directive is.
To tackle indecision by prospective buyers, GRTU strongly recommends a 6 month moratorium on the payment of stamp duty on property purchased by first time buyers.
GRTU recommends that Government gives a 6 month concession period to first-time buyers including foreigners so that they are exempt from stamp duty on prices up to Lm50,000. This would effectively kick start the economy in property transactions, tempting buyers get out from the waiting game thus removing fear and uncertainty.
PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE ON IMPLEMENTING THE PRINCIPLE OF
EQUAL TREATMENT BETWEEN PERSONS IRRESPECTIVE OF RELIGION OR BELIEF, DISABILITY,
AGE OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION COM(2008)426 FINAL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. GRTU cannot support the
directive proposal in its present form since it would create legal
uncertainty and additional burdens for the enter-prises in the
commerce sector.
2. Instead of new legislation with an
unclear outcome, GRTU advocates a non-legislative approach and is very
much in favour of an intensified and structured dialogue between public
authorities, business and all other stake-holders concerned, in particular NGOs
representing those groups of society which are exposed to discrimination.
STATEMENT
1. GRTU is opposed to discrimination of any kind and is hence fully committed to tackle this phenomenon in the
best possible way. It is part of retailers’ strategy to make their stores
freely accessible to as many customers as possible. In times of demographic
change, for example, the unrestricted accessibility to goods and services is
even becoming a competitive advantage. Therefore, it is obvious that
discrimination is by no means in the interest of retailers.
2. The promotion of equal
opportunities has been a priority of GRTU for a long time. Many enterprises in
commerce are committed to the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility and
make an effort to live up to society’s expectations through the adoption of
numerous voluntary measures which aim to offer their customers a barrier-free
and non-discriminatory shopping environment.
3. Notwithstanding its commitment to
fight discrimination, GRTU disapproves the directive proposal in its current
form for a number of reasons.
4. From GRTU’s point of view, the existing directives based on
article 13 of the EC Treaty along with the corresponding national laws already
offer a comprehensive framework to combat discrimination. Therefore,
GRTU is not in favour of any new legislation at EU level and rather stresses
the need for a proper implementation of the already existing legislation.
5.
GRTU is not convinced that additional legislation would be of significant
benefit for the target groups. It is rather questionable that more detailed
legislation would bring about substantial changes regarding discrimination.
Discrimination is a societal problem which starts in people’s minds and
which will not disappear quicker due to a new law but rather through education
and sensitisation of the citizens. Therefore, GRTU advocates the promotion
of non-legislative measures which, from its point of view, are the
best-suited tools to ease the access to goods and services for all.
6. As far as the concrete content of
the directive proposal is concerned, GRTU would like to make the following remarks:
· According to article 3, paragraph
1, subparagraph (d), commerce would be directly affected by the directive.
In the explanatory memorandum of the proposal, the Commission states that the
initiative aims, amongst others, “to ensure legal certainty for economic
operators”. GRTU feels however that this condition is not fulfilled in the
present proposal. On the contrary, for GRTU this directive proposal would
create legal uncertainty since it is very vague on a number of crucial
points.
· This is particularly true for article
4 which deals with the equal treatment of persons with disabilities.
As regards paragraph 1, subparagraph a), it goes without saying that
retailers anticipate the needs of all their customers when, for example, it
comes to the opening of new shops. It is however not clear for GRTU what can be
understood by “appropriate modifications or adjustments” for already
existing stores. Where does this start and where does it end? Would this mean
that stores need to be rebuilt in order to be 100 percent barrier-free? Would
every multi-storey store have to be equipped with elevators? Would all products
need to have Braille-marked price tags? In GRTU’s opinion this provision is
unacceptable, at least disproportionate per se, because the existing stores
were constructed in compliance with the laws that were valid and applicable at
the time of construction. For GRTU, it is therefore imperative to safeguard the
perpetuation of the status quo for already existing stores.
· Paragraph 2 of article 4 does not really give a satisfactory answer to these exemplary
questions. The indicators that are given to define what would be a disproportionate
burden are also very vague and thus not helpful. Where does the
Commission draw the line when it comes to “the size and resources of the organisation,
its nature, the estimated cost, the lifecycle of the goods and services” etc.?
Does this stipulation, for example, refer to sales, the number of employees or
gross profit? Especially small and medium-sized enterprises, which
account for 95 percent and thus are the backbone of the commerce sector, could
be seriously affected in their business activities by an extensive application
of this paragraph.
· In this context, GRTU is also very
critical of the possible consequences that an extensive application of article
7 (defence of rights by associations, organisations or other legal
entities) in combination with article 8 (reversal of the burden of
proof) might have for the commerce sector and, again, SMEs in particular. In extreme
cases, the consequences of these provisions might be numerous legal procedures
by associations or lawyers who simply want to make a point as well as an
unmanageable amount of bureaucracy because every single activity of an
enterprise would have to be documented. For companies, however, legal certainty,
predictability and as little bureaucracy as possible are essential
conditions in order to be able to thrive.
· On
the other hand, GRTU fully agrees with the content of article 11 which
urges the Member States to encourage dialogue with the relevant stakeholders.
From GRTU’s point of view, dialogue is the best possible way to deal with a phenomenon like discrimination and to create a
discrimination-free society. It should be the role of the European Commission and the public authorities in the Member States to encourage and
facilitate the dialogue between all parties that are concerned.
12. Furthermore, GRTU would like to stress that the commerce sector is very
open towards dialogue and many enterprises already engage regularly in dialogue
with stakeholders of all kinds on a voluntary basis in order to take due
account of societal needs. Eventually, it is in the companies’ own interest to
attract a wide range of customers. Given the aging society, coupled with an
increasing number of people with special physical needs, many stores have, for
instance, al-ready adapted their sales area and their range of products.
13. To conclude, GRTU would also like to remind the European Commission of
its commitments that it has made in the Small Business Act and the Better
Regulation Strategy. Instead of creating additional layers of legislation,
the European Commission should focus on consolidating and simplifying existing
laws and cutting red tape wherever possible. Hence, for GRTU it is
indispensable to strive for equilibrium between legislative measures against
discrimination and the needs and interests of business, in particular SMEs.
CONCLUSION
1. GRTU cannot tolerate
discrimination but at the same time, it does not approve the directive proposal
of the European Commission because GRTU considers the proposal too vague and
impractical. Enterprises in the commerce sector, and in particular SMEs, need a stable environment with legal predictability and less bureaucracy in order to be able to thrive.
2. Therefore, instead of creating
additional layers of legislation which might not lead to the commonly desired
results, GRTU advocates non-legislative measures and an intensified
dialogue between all stakeholders in order to raise awareness and to
exchange best practices. This dialogue should be facilitated by the European
Commission and the public authorities in the Member States.
3. GRTU calls on the European
Commission, the Council and the European Parliament to take commerce’s concerns
into account and to assure that the following legislative process will have a proportionate
and counterbalanced out-come.
Equal treatment between persons irrespective of their religion, belief, disability, age and sexual orientation
On 2 July 2008, the European Commission (EC) adopted a directive proposal which aims to provide for protection from discrimination.
So far, discrimination based on age, religion or belief, sexual orientation and disability is only prohibited in the fields of employment, occupation and vocational training. With its latest directive proposal, the EC intends to fill this gap.
By means of this new directive the EC wants to ensure equal treatment in the areas of social protection, including social security and health care, education and access to and supply of goods and services which are commercially available to the public, including housing. Thus, commerce is directly affected by this directive proposal.
GRTU cannot support the directive proposal in its present form since it would create legal uncertainty and additional burdens for the enterprises in the commerce sector.
Instead of new legislation with an unclear outcome, GRTU advocates a non-legislative approach and is very much in favour of an intensified and structured dialogue between public authorities, business and all other stakeholders concerned, in particular NGOs representing those groups of society which are exposed to discrimination.
The European Commission has welcomed the support of the European Parliament for its proposal to simplify the approval of hydrogen powered vehicles. This will mark a step forward in the development and marketing of clean and safe hydrogen vehicles.
As a result, they will be seen more often on Europe's streets and the European automotive industry could become more competitive by taking the lead in hydrogen technology.
At the moment, uniform requirements for hydrogen vehicles are not included in the EU vehicle type-approval system. This poses problems for hydrogen vehicle manufacturers when trying to place these vehicles on the market in the EU. Currently, even if a vehicle obtains national or single type-approval in one Member State (MS), it is not guaranteed that the registration of this vehicle will be authorised in all the other MS. Further, MS have the possibility to establish different requirements for issuing an approval certificate. This situation results in a fragmented internal market of hydrogen powered vehicles, as well as complicated and costly approval procedures, which discourages the introduction of this environmentally friendly technology.
The proposed single approval will be sufficient for the entire EU. At the same time, the Regulation will guarantee that all hydrogen vehicles put on the market in the EU are at least as safe as conventional vehicles. A Commission study shows that the simplified procedures could result in a saving of up to €124m in approval costs to vehicle manufacturers in the period 2017-2025.
The Budget is approaching and our developers section led by section president Sandro Chetcuti presented their elaborate paper this morning during a press conference.
GRTU this morning, as was promised yesterday by the Director General Vincent Farrugia on Bondi+, published its proposals on Government's Utility Rate Tariffs.
On 2 July 2008, the European Commission (EC) adopted a directive proposal which aims to provide for protection from discrimination.
