Slow-moving as always, Malta has not been making the most of EU funding in education and training, with staff at the European Union Programmes Agency experiencing a number of shortcomings that have been hampering their work.
This was clearly revealed when The Malta Independent on Sunday investigated the situation at what is commonly known as the European Union Programmes Unit (EUPU), which has finally been established as a national agency in its own right.
According to European Commission regulations, the agency should have been established as a separate legal entity on 1 January 2007.
A legal notice was issued more than four months later, on 4 May 2007 to be precise, effectively establishing the unit as a national agency having a “distinct legal personality”.
The agency has been operating without the services of a director since former national coordinator Adrian Tonna handed in his resignation in December, while the financial controller also resigned in January. Three temporary directors are currently filling in, until a new national coordinator is appointed.
A call for applications for this post was issued on 23 April and this news, together with the recent publication of the legal notice, is certainly a sign that things are improving, but to what extent?
The office is currently operating with just five officers, three managers and three administrative staff, when the staff complement is supposed to be 20. Last September there was 22 staff but many have resigned since then.
Such a situation at the agency is strange, considering that about four years after Malta applied to join the EU in 1990, the Education Ministry had expressed its “firm” intention to the European Commission that Malta intended to participate in the EU educational programmes.
The EUPU was established on 25 January 2000, following a Cabinet decision on 18 January of the same year. The agency is currently responsible for the management and monitoring of EU programmes and projects, namely the LifeLong Learning Programme and the YOUTH IN ACTION Programme.
Some beneficiaries who participated in EU programmes and presented their final report for evaluation last September, only received the payments they were due two weeks ago, even though the regulations stipulate that the agency is meant to pay beneficiaries 45 days after they present their final report.
The government has not yet nominated any assessors this year to evaluate forthcoming programmes, even if the first deadline for one of them, Grundtvig, is 18 May.
Officers working at the agency are finding it very hard to cope with the processing of applications. They are working overtime without getting paid but still cannot manage to deal with all of their tasks.
According to the recently-published legal notice, the national agency’s responsibilities include giving information and publicity on the various EU educational, research and cultural programmes, providing counselling services to potential applicants, and receiving and assessing proposals, just to mention a few responsibilities.
Without any doubt, such a tall order requires more than just seven officers. Many had resigned as time went by and the agency is finding it difficult to employ new people, particularly since officers are offered a minimum annual salary of about Lm6,100 (minimum salary scale 9).
Of noteworthy significance is that both the Education Ministry and the European Commission fork out funds to cover the expenses of the employees’ salaries and the daily running of the office.
Does the Maltese government have to drag its feet in such cases, especially when funding is also provided by the EU and when its intention to participate in these programmes was so “firm”?