The Chamber of Commerce is suggesting that the years of compulsory education should increase by two, with students finishing at 18 years of age instead of 16.

In launching a document on a strategy for the workforce last week, the Chamber said that the extra two years should not be spent in secondary education but in what it described as post-secondary training, as successful employees need to have a “solid basis on which to develop careers”. Whether the chamber means having some kind of trade schools remains to be explained.

Its idea stems from the fact that Malta has a high rate of early school-leavers, many of whom are ending their compulsory education without having obtained any qualifications. At least, these extra two years will prepare them for the working world, the chamber seems to be saying.

The two unions representing teachers do not agree with the proposal, and came out strongly against it. Both the Malta Union of Teachers and the Union of Professional Educators say that the educational system should not just serve the interests of the business community, but should be a holistic experience aimed at enabling individuals to achieve their potential as human beings, and not just as workers.

The MUT went as far as indicating that one reason why students were leaving school early was because some businesses were encouraging them to take up a job without furthering their education, offering them what the MUT said were “attractive salaries”.

Among other  objections raised were that there are not enough teachers to cope with the increase in the workload; that employers are shrugging off their responsibilities to train unskilled workers; and that the income tax generated by the 16-17-year-olds who enter the labour market will be lost.  

While the chamber has its own reasons and justifications as to why it wants to extend the compulsory schooling system, the unions representing teachers are throwing it out the window as they say it will have a negative impact on their members.

Yet the proposal should not be dismissed without at least being given due consideration and without there being a discussion, on a national basis.

The education ministry, as well as the opposition, have so far remained silent on the idea, and it would be good to know what they think about it.

Are they interested in at least discussing the suggestion, or are they turning it down immediately without giving it a second thought?

Are they afraid that such a subject has been brought up on the eve of an election, the first one in which the people directly involved – those aged 16-17 – will be casting their vote for the first time? Do the political parties fear that they will lose support if they even say they want to talk about it?

Naturally, if such an upheaval to the system is to be introduced, it should be done after a serious study is carried out and with the participation of all the stakeholders.

So far, what we have is just an idea that needs to be discussed, and not thrown away just because teachers don’t like it.