The Services Directive, currently being debated in the European Parliament, is an opportunity for Malta to take part in the free market, however education and essential services should not be liberalised, MEP Simon Busuttil said yesterday.

Speaking during a poorly-attended debate organised by the University Students Council, Dr Busuttil reaffirmed his position that the directive was a huge opportunity for Malta’s service based economy.

The Services Directive implements the “country of origin” principle, so that service providers operating legally in one member state can market services in others without having to comply with further rules in “host” member states. It also removes “unnecessary” restrictions, for example, relating to cross-border services or service providers.

The directive also obliges national authorities to exchange information and work more closely together, and have “business-friendly” procedures.

It also establishes some common rules in order to increase trust and confidence in cross-border services.

Daniela Grech, who represented JEFF Malta, an organisation based on federalist principles, said the group did not have a common position on the directive but there were obvious positive aspects, such as the possibility of a fall in prices and the creation of service-based jobs.

However, she said that in its current form, the directive lacked social sustainability and threatens to undermine collective agreements across the EU.

KSU president Anthony Camilleri said the past months had been a period of reflection for the EU. The Services Directive had been met with strong public opposition from all sectors, he said, adding that it was a pity that there had been almost no debate on the issue in Malta.

He stressed that higher education could not be seen as a simple commodity, and he asked if the EU was actually protecting big governments instead of favouring more decentralisation.

“Is the EU an institution where technocrats rule or is it really for the people?” he asked.

Dr Justin Fenech, president of the European Students Union, said the directive was rather vague on the issue of education. He said the public had a right to know what the directive was actually proposing, stating that in its present form it actually went against the Bologna Process.

“Does the directive mean that foreign universities will now be allowed to operate in Malta without any restrictions?” he asked.

Representing the Malta Union of Teachers, Franklin Barbara said the union had not yet taken a position on the directive, however the European Trade Union Congress for Education, of which it is a member, had already declared itself against the directive.

He said ETUCE was urging politicians to ensure that education remained outside the realm of market forces and that this was strictly a national matter.

Mr Barbara said the ETUCE strongly opposed the neo-liberal agenda and lack of social concerns that could be found in the text of the directive.

Alternattiva Demokratika’s education spokesperson Mario Mallia said the Lisbon Agenda promoted social cohesion which will eventually be dismantled by this directive.

He explained that a foreign business operating in another EU country would only be bound by the rules applicable in its home country and not regulated by the host country.

This directive, he said, would speed up de-regulation and the “race to the bottom” would intensify. He said the European Greens were proposing that the directive clearly defines the position on education, and how the eventual liberalisation of services would work.

“However, the directive still has a big ideological problem and this has to do with its promotion of an open market without frontiers,” he added.

Although the directive is very important for us, we should not let the market become our “be-all and end-all,” MEP Simon Busuttil said.

“We should discuss in a mature and non-partisan manner what sectors can be left out of the directive. Education and health services must be left out,” he added.

Dr Busuttil argued that while education was essentially a state service, the directive could be applied to the english language school business.

He said the Council of Ministers appeared to have a common position on the directive which was positive.

Dr Busuttil said the trend in the European Parliament was one towards a positive vote in January.

“Still, I do admit that the European Commission did a very bad job in informing the public about the directive which is completely misunderstood. It has been a public relations disaster,” Dr Busuttil added.