I hope there are not many who find themselves confused, like I do, about the state of what used to be called "technical" education. I must have failed to keep myself abreast of the changes and reforms conducted over the years.

In the past, one way or the other, young people used to be well trained in the skills of basic engineering, electrical and mechanical, later electronic as well. They would get their education in a technical institute, a school that was run in tandem with a Swiss institution and above all at the shipyards. Apprentices and students would not proceed to academic levels but they would end up with a formidable technical knowhow.

Over the years, the techniques involved have progressed enormously. Training would have had to evolve accordingly. But how much interest remains in this type of education? What importance is it being given outside the companies which do maintenance work for aircraft? Is it true that there are not enough Maltese students in "technical" areas, and that adequate training facilities are lacking, while incentives are insufficient? Plus that in this area as well, we are having to turn to foreign workers?

***

THE GERMAN GOVERNMENT

In past weeks, speculation continued to mount regarding the future of the German government as a coalition between the socialists, the liberals and the greens. Dissatisfaction within the respective parties has kept growing. Two of them (the socialists and the greens) replaced the personnel at the high end of the party's administration in a move that  was considered as preparation for a looming federal election. A problem for the parties in government is that the German economy is trailing.

Meanwhile the extreme right has consolidated its position while the centre-right, though on top, is still not increasing its popular support. The risk is not slim that Germany could get caught, like France recently, in a vicious political circle of ineffectual manoeuvering. Apparently some elements of the centre-right are hoping that after the elections, they could create a "grand" coalition with the socialists, with the latter as the junior partner.

***

UNION MEMBERS

One understands that private sector representatives feel discomfort when proposals are being made to increase the membership of workers in trade unions. However in the past I also met entrepreneurs who would say they preferred for their workforce to be unionised since then their firm's industrial relations could be managed in a more stable way following agreement with the union of their employees.

Anyway now certain private sector exponents have gone to the extreme of calling the government's initiative to introduce some form of automatic membership of workers in a union, as a push to get us aligned with North Korea. This is an exagerration and simply makes no sense.

The government's interest in the idea is legitimate and justified, for social and economic reasons. On the latter: the initiatve should help moves towards a goal that all claim to agree with: the need to jack up the productivitity and value added of our economic system. About the social need for the proposed measure there is little to be said: it is evident.

The government is doing the right thing by investigating how best to calibrate what it seeks to achieve on this issue, according to the specific circumstances of the country,