Aġenzija tal-Konsumaturi

FL-AĦĦAR elezzjoni kien hemm ħaġa li ż-żewġ partiti ewlenin qablu magħha – it-twaqqif ta’ Aġenzija tal-Konsumaturi. Biss minkejja dan, ftit li xejn kien hemm dettalji dwarha.

Dan il-fatt jindika li ż-żewġ partiti jemmnu li għad fadlilna ħafna x’naqdfu biex inħarsu l-konsumaturi sew mill-eċċessi u n-nuqqasijiet tas-suq. Juri wkoll li l-istrutturi li għandna bħalissa mhumiex qegħdin iħallu l-effett mixtieq.

Tajjeb nagħtu ħarsa ħafifa lejn l-istrutturi statali li għandna bħalissa. Hemm id-Diviżjoni tal-Konsumaturi u l-Kom-petizzjoni. Hemm il-Kunsill għall-Affarijiet tal-Konsumatur u hemm l-Awtoritajiet li jirregolaw diversi oqsma. Kollha għandhom funzjoni differenti iżda suppost għandek koordi-nazzjoni bejniethom biex jassiguraw li l-kompetizzjoni taħdem tajjeb għall-ġid tal-konsumaturi.

Għalkemm il-Kunsill għall-Affarijiet tal-Konsumaturi mhux parti integrali mid-Diviżjoni, jekk se jsir xi tibdil għandna wkoll inħarsu lejn dan il-Kunsill u naraw dwar ir-rwol tiegħu. S’issa dan dejjem kien is-Cindirella u peress li qatt ma kellu flus ivvutati għalih, dejjem kien jiddependi minn fuq id-Diviżjoni jew idur fuq kumpaniji privati biex jagħmel xi ħaġa. Barra dan il-gvern qatt ma tah importanza u ftit li xejn, mit-twaqqif tie-għu, kien ikkonsultat. Barra dan, ir-relazzjonijiet ta’ dan il-Kunsill mal-għaqda tal-Konsumaturi marru għall-agħar. Minflok ra kif jista’ jgħin lill-unika għaqda li hawn aktar jidher li hu moħħu li juża metodi sproporzjonati biex jaqdi dmirijietu. Fuq kollox, dan l-aħħar snin qatt ma kellu l-ħila li jara l-operat tad-Diviżjoni u jara li din qegħda tipproduċi s-servizz meħtieġ.

Fuq l-Awtoritajiet ftit li xejn nistgħu ngħidu ġdid. Huma biss ftit li qegħdin jagħtu kas li tikber il-kompetizzjoni għall-benefiċċju tal-konsumaturi. Il-maġġoranza tagħhom jin-teressahom li jkunu rubber stamp tal-gvern tal-ġurnata. Ħafna minnhom jinħtiġilhom taqliba kbira fit-tmexxija. Sakemm it-tmexxija ta’ dawn ma tkunx inspirata mill-ġid tal-konsumaturi, minkejja li ħafna għandhom ħaddiema kapaċi, ftit li xejn jista’ jittama l-konsumatur lokali li jista’ jilħaq livelli li huma aċċettabbli fl-Unjoni Ewropea.

Niġu issa għad-Diviżjoni tal-Konsumaturi u l-Kompetiz-zjoni. Niftakar madwar xi għoxrin sena ilu meta twaqqaf id-Dipartiment tal-Konsumaturi l-Għaqda tal-Konsuma-turi kienet qalet li hi tippreferi li kieku minflok dipartiment titwaqqaf awtorità li tkun indipendenti fuq il-mudell tal-Office of Fair Trading tal-Ingilterra. Ngħidha ċara. Li kieku dak iż-żmien kellna l-esperjenza ta’ kif qegħdin jimxu ħafna awtoritajiet illum, il-probabbiltà ma konniex nitolbu dan biss għax ħafna minn dawn l-awtoritajiet illum qegħdin jaħdmu qishom dipartimenti tal-gvern – jagħmlu dak li jrid il-ministru. Id-differenza prinċipali hi li barra l-vot li jirċievu mingħand il-gvern (taxxi mħallsa mill-konsumaturi), qegħdin jimponu prezzijiet għas-servizzi li jagħtu lill-konsumaturi bil-konsegwenza li l-konsumaturi qed ikollhom iħallsu darbtejn għall-istess servizz. It-tieni differenza hi, li speċjalment dawk li jmexxu, is-salarji tagħhom m’għandhomx limiti u mhix marbuta ma’ kemm benefiċċji qegħdin iħallu lill-konsumaturi.

Hu għalhekk li jekk din id-Diviżjoni ssir Awtorità hemm bżonn ta’ aktar tibdil li jkun meħtieġ biex din ma ssirx awtorità oħra li minflok tgħin lill-konsumaturi hi piż ieħor mat-taxxi li diġà jġorru.

Biex naraw x’hemm bżonn li jsir tajjeb naraw l-akbar difetti tal-Awtoritajiet li għandna llum. F’okkażjonijiet oħra diġà ktibt li awtorità timxi tajjeb jew le skont min ikun qed imexxiha. Mhix kwistjoni li l-persuna trid tkun ġejja mill-kamp politiku oppost biex titmexxa tajjeb. Min ikun qed imexxi għandu jkollu l-fiduċja tal-gvern u jmexxi fuq il-politika tal-gvern tal-ġurnata. Biss dan ma jfissirx li l-awtorità titmexxa qisha rubber stamp. Min ikun qed imexxi hemm bżonn li jkollu ideat ċari biex imexxi l-aġenda tal-konsumturi.

Preżentament dan hu l-akbar tħassib tal-konsumaturi. Ħarsa lejn il-ġurnali mill-ewwel tintebaħ li l-konsumaturi jridu li l-istruttura taħdem sew, b’mod effiċjenti, tiddeċiedi fi żmien raġonevoli, u b’mod li l-konsumaturi jkunu jafu dak li qed isir. Hu għalhekk li dak li jsir irid jindirizza din il-problema.

Min imexxi jrid ikollu wkoll il-fiduċja tal-konsumaturi. Biex dan isir hemm bżonn li l-konsumaturi jkollhom idea ta’ min ikun se jmexxi din l-aġenzija. Riċentement assistejna għall-metodu li jin-tuża fl-Ewropa meta titwaqqaf kummissjoni ġdida. Min ikun intgħażel mill-President irid iwieġeb lill-Parlament Ewropew biex jassigura li l-persuna magħżula hi tajba u tista’ tmexxi l-qasam li tkun se tmexxi b’mod li jnissel fiduċja. Din is-sistema mhix xi ħaġa ġdida għax ilha tintuża fl-Istati Uniti tal-Amerika. Jekk titħaddem tajjeb, għandha l-benefiċċji tagħha.


Din is-sistema għandha tibda tintuża u jkun tajjeb li għandha tintuża fuq min se jkun qed imexxi din l-aġenzija jew awtorità. Min jintgħażel bħala Chairman u CEO mill-gvern għandu jidher quddiem Kumitat Parlamentari u jwie-ġeb għall-mistoqsijiet tagħhom fuq dak li bi ħsiebu jagħmel u kif għandu l-ħsieb li jmexxi. Kif taħdem is-sistema nafu għax kien hemm coverage kbir meta nħatar John Dalli bħala Kummissarju. B’hekk kulħadd ikun jaf jekk it-tmexxija l-ġdida għandhiex il-‘mindset’ biex imexxi l-aġenda tal-kon-sumaturi ’l quddiem.

Din is-sistema mhux biss għandha l-benefiċċju li l-Parlament ikollu aktar poteri u skrutinju kif qegħdin jintefqu flus il-konsumaturi iżda tnaq-qas ukoll il-formalità ta’ meta jiltaqa’ l-Parlament kollu u għalhekk forsi tonqos l-għebusija ta’ kif jivvutaw. Din forsi hi aktar tama minn realtà iżda hu pass li għandna nieħdu biex forsi l-affarijiet jimxu aħjar għal kulħadd.

Għandha benefiċċju akbar li min ikun se jmexxi jieħu l-messaġġ li dak li jkun qed jagħmel, se jkun kontabbli għalih. Biss bejn id-diskors u l-fatti hemm baħar jikkumbatti. U għalhekk nemmen li barra li din l-aġenzija jkollha l-iskrutinju tal-Parlament, trid tkun kontabbli kontinwament. Biex isir dan, il-Kumitat Parlamentari jrid ikun responsabbli li kontinwament jissorvelja x-xogħol ta’ din l-aġenzija. Mhux biżżejjed li jkollna s-sistema preżenti fejn awtorità tressaq rapport darba fis-sena fil-Parlament u jsir dibattitu li, tista’ tgħid dejjem, jimxi fuq il-linji tal-partiti politiċi u għalhekk ħlief abjad min-naħa tal-gvern u iswed, min-naħa tal-oppożizzjoni, ma nisimgħux. Bis-sistema preżenti kollox jibqa’ kif inhu għax jekk l-affarijiet imorru ħażin għall-gvern tal-ġurnata, dawn ikunu interpretati bħala vot fuq il-gvern u mhux fuq l-awtorità.

Dan il-Kumitat Parlamentari jrid jassumi ċerta responsabbiltajiet tat-tmexxija u sorveljanza. Meta qed ngħid tmexxija, ma jfissirx li dan il-Kumitat imexxi direttament din l-Aġenzija hu iżda indirettament it-tmexxija trid tkun sorveljata. Ir-rapport annwali mhux biss irid ikun fih x’sar tul is-sena, iżda dak li jrid isir is-sena ta’ wara.


Meta qed ngħid x’sar tul is-sena dan irid iqabbel dak li kellu jintlaħaq ma’ dak li sar. B’hekk nistgħu nkunu nafu kemm qiegħda taħdem tajjeb din l-Aġenzija u jekk din hix qiegħda tkun ‘value for money’. Huma l-uffiċjali li jkunu jridu jwieġbu u mhux il-Ministru li taħtu jaqa’ dan il-qasam. B’hekk tispiċċa s-sistema ta’ ħokkli dahri biex inħokk tiegħek. Illum is-sistema taħdem li dawk li jkunu qegħdin imexxu jkunu r-rubber stamp tal-Ministru u jsir biss dak li jmexxi hu. Min-naħa l-oħra, l-uffiċjali jinsabu komdi wara l-kwinti għax hu l-Ministru li jkollu jwieġeb fil-Parlament.

Semmejt li dan il-Kumitat irid ikun infurmat bil-pjan tas-sena li tkun ġejja. Dan iservi biex ikun kejl ma’ xiex tkun imqabbla l-ħidma sena wara. Iżda dan il-pjan ma jridx ikun biss sett ta’ miżuri iżda jrid jgħid il-bażi li fuqu nbena. Bħala eżempju mhux biżżejjed li ngħidu li l-Aġenzija se tara kif qed jaħdem ċertu suq f’Malta, iżda jrid jgħid x’wassalha li jintgħażel dan is-suq u mhux ieħor. B’hekk l-Aġenzija tkun immexxija fuq strateġija biex jissolvew il-problemi li jkunu qegħdin jiffaċċjaw il-konsumaturi.

Il-Kumitat irid ikun proattiv u jekk ikun ippreżentat b’xi rapport dwar xi suq, m’għandux għalfejn jiddejjaq u jara l-operaturi u l-konsumaturi x’għandhom xi jgħidu. Fuq kollox il-Kumitat ma jridx jiddejjaq li jekk jara li hemm xi ħaġa li ma tkunx qegħda taħdem tajjeb tgħajjat lill-Aġenzija biex tispjega għaliex u xi tkun qegħda tagħmel hi. Riċentement kellna l-każ ta’ trasmissjonijiet tal-logħob tal-futbol tat-Tazza tad-Dinja. Il-Kumitat tal-Parlament sejjaħ lill-Awtoritajiet responsabbli kollha biex iwieġbu għaliex inħolqot din is-sitwazzjoni. Il-fatt li ħareġ li l-kumpaniji nvoluti ma fthemux kien pressjoni pubblika biżżejjed li ressaq lil dawk involuti għall-ġid tal-konsumaturi.

Immaġinaw l-effett li jista’ jkollu jekk, per eżempju, min qed imexxi l-Awtorità tar-Riżorsi jissejjaħ biex pubblikament jgħid għaliex l-Awtorità aċċettat li tgħolli l-gass. Lanqas jekk ma jinbidel xejn, il-konsumaturi jkollhom sodisfazzjon ta’ kif ittieħdet id-deċiżjoni u jaraw jekk l-interessi tagħhom ġewx imħarsa.


Suġġett jaħraq ieħor hu l-prezzijiet tal-mediċini. Suġġett bħal dan hu kkomplikat u nistenna li wara li jsir rapport kif qed jaħdem is-suq ikun hemm public hearing fejn l-affarijiet ikunu trasparenti għal kulħadd. Hu b’hekk biss li jistgħu jispiċċaw is-suspetti ta’ wieħed fuq l-ieħor. Barra minn hekk naraw il-fatturi kollha u minn kobbla mħabbla nippruvaw noħorġu soluzzjonijiet.

Hu minħabba dawn l-affarijiet li nemmen li mhux biżżejjed li nagħmlu Aġenzija li jkollha l-forma ta’ Awtorità. Din l-Aġenzija trid tkun kontabbli u l-aħjar mod li tkun kontabbli hi li l-uffiċjali li jkunu qegħdin imexxuha jkunu hekk b’mod pubbliku.

Published in it-Torca of the 11th July 2010

Characteristics the new Consumer Agency should have

Some time ago in one of my articles, I picked upon some of the characteristics that the new Consumer Agency should have. One characteristic that is necessary is independence especially from the government of the day. Even though at first glance this seems a very plausible proposition, it is still as elusive as ever.

It is a very plausible proposition as the amount of services still provided by the government is still large though it has greatly dwindled. When most services used to be provided by government, it was understandable that such institutions would be controlled if they were to take their task too seriously, as they should have had, they surely would have rocked the boat both for the organisation providing the service and the government of the day.

Three strategies were used. Two of these were used to maintain structural control of the institution which was supposed to ensure a fair deal for consumers. The intention was to ensure that no turbulence is created as a result. The first strategy was to maintain direct Ministerial control through the structure of a department. Mind you, this had some benefits, especially when the politician concerned was interested in the area as it provided the stimulus for the Department to bring about radical changes. However, this direct control ensured that even such radical changes would be implemented in such a way as to ensure that the services provided by government were protected from the pressure they might have had to endure especially where standards were concerned. The same applied to products and services provided by the private sector. I find it hard to remember a public warning issued by the Consumer and Competition Division even though the present legislation permits such action.

The second strategy emanates from such a structure. The departmental structure ensured that the personnel within the structure will tow the line of the government as their career prospects depended on the whims of the political masters. This ensured that the personnel looked up to try to decipher these whims. In the process they lose any motivation and independence they might have had.

The third line to secure the government’s peace of mind were the borders they set for themselves. Public services were defined out of bounds for the simple reason that the consumer does not pay directly for them. Consequently, the services offered by the largest two departments (nowadays called Divisions), those of Health and Education, were excluded. This is in spite of the fact that most of the taxation consumers are paying is being devoted to these entities.

Clearly it is important that the new Consumer Agency will address these three deficiencies as these will shackle the new structure and condemn it to the same status as the old one. The only difference would be a new name. Thus it is worthwhile to discuss how this can be done.

Let’s take a look at the structure itself. This structure should not be answerable to a Minister but to the whole Parliament. This does not mean that such a structure simply should take the form of an authority. The reason is that if we do, there is a high risk that we would end up having another sterile authority. As I have argued in other articles, an important factor is the selection of the Chairman. However, I still believe that we need to take a more structured approach.

As I said above, I believe that such an authority should be answerable to the whole Parliament. Mind you, I do not believe that the usual procedure should be used. The fact that an authority lays its report on the Table of the House and a discussion may ensue is not enough to maintain accountability. I personally believe that if we really believe that Consumer Affairs should be given their true importance and in the process ensure that such an Agency is proactive we need to appoint a standing House Committee to take care of Consumer Affairs in general and this Agency in particular. This Committee should not only review the yearly report but should also discuss the work-plan for the forthcoming year. This work-plan should be amended, if need be, and once finalised should serve as a benchmark against which the following report should be compared with.

Supervision should form only a part of the interaction that should be nourished between this Committee and this Agency. If the Agency is proactive it should provide this Committee with discussion papers of the issues being faced by consumers. This Committee through public interaction should also note the challenges being faced and together with the Agency and the NGOs develop strategies to meet these challenges both on the local front and on the international arena especially at the EU level.

The present Consumer Affairs Act already gives an indication of the importance of market surveillance and this Parliamentary Committee would be the forum where studies undertaken by the new Consumer Agency on certain issues, e.g. how particular markets are operating, would be discussed. In this way problems are dealt with publicly. This will not only destroy the perception that those in power are only interested in the consumer on the eve of an election but will also raise consumer awareness to important issues.

The dependence of the staff on the political class is not restricted to this area. This malady affects all the civil service. Unless and until the civil service is held accountable for its actions, non-actions and ministerial cover-ups it will be difficult to make them committed to the departmental aims and objectives rather than to the Minister. Having such an Agency controlled by a Parliamentary Committee will go a long way to solve this problem as the civil service will have to answer personally and publicly.

The third problem listed above can be solved by simply extending the remit of the Agency to cover services provided by government. Mind you, in today’s world where these services are also being provided by the private sector, it does not make sense to have the private sector part accountable while the chunk provided by the public sector is not. Moreover, the fallacy that the services being provided by the public sector are free does not take much to counter. Consumers know they are paying through their taxes.

There is one final point I wish to make. Why is it taking so long for Government to set up this Agency? My gut feeling is that there is more to it than it appears. I was surprised that when celebrating this year’s Consumer Rights Day nothing was mentioned about it. What was stranger was that days before this Day, the GRTU launched an attack on this Agency questioning ‘the need for such an agency when consumers were already being abusive’. The GRTU said that we are being faced by a ‘”new class of consumer” who is abusive, arrogant and at times violent.’

The Ghaqda tal-Konsumaturi was surprised as our view is that when compared with other EU consumers, ours were definitely not assertive let alone violent. We wrote to the Commissioner of Police to see if this were true. The answer we got was that the Police do not keep such statistics. But we are sure that if it were true that there was any upsurge by consumers, others amongst them the Police would have noticed since being violent is a criminal act and we’re sure that these would have been reported at least in the press. Whatever the case, was it a coincidence that after this attack by the GRTU, nothing was heard again of the Consumer Agency?!

This article was published on Maltastar.com of the 27^thJune 2010

Note: Since the time this article was written, we heard that the new Consumer Agency is in the Government's pipeline.

Shops’ opening times

The controversy around controlling the time when shops should be allowed to open is rolling again. Paradoxically, it was started by the GRTU which up to some years ago opposed the public demand that shops should be allowed to open on Sundays. This year the GRTU proposed that shops should be allowed to open on the 31st March which is a public holiday. On that day, there seems to have been a consensus between the constituted bodies. The government agreed. There was another request by the GRTU for shops to be allowed to open on May 1st, another public holiday. The Ghaqda tal-Konsumaturi supported this position.

This time round ranks split. The Chamber of Commerce objected regarding shops opening on 1st May and the Government did not grant this request. The issue took a turn as the Ghaqda in its statement raised the issue of shops’ opening hours. It was stated that the legislation should be changed in order to allow shops to open at all times.

There are several reasons for this position both commercial and social. It should be realised that today, the official policy is that of a liberalised market. If we look at the commercial side and recognise the amount of capital involved in setting up a shop, one would easily understand the reason. A small calculation will help here. Assuming that the shop owner opens between 09.00 – 13.00 and 16.00 – 19.00 on week days, opens half day on Saturday and remains closed on Sunday one finds that the shop owner can only utilise less than a 25% of the time available to cover his capital and make a living.

The situation is further complicated if we look at the time a working couple can work within these opening hours. A couple who work from 8.00 a.m. till 19.00 will find that it has only about 3 hours to do shopping from such shops during a weekday. It is because of this situation that Saturday morning is usually devoted to shopping as it has four hours of shopping time available at a stretch though Saturday does not provide the solution to all consumers as parents with young children know. This time restriction is increasing the cost of business which cost is then shared between the commercial outlet and the consumer. This, apart from the fact that we are depriving ourselves of a higher rate of wealth generation.

The above generalisation already shows how illogical the present system is. It may have been logical when it was introduced but surely it doesn’t fit with the changes undergone by society. However, there is another aspect. Business should be left to operate as freely as possible. This should not be interpreted that such structures as regulators or consumer protection or the setting up of standards should be abolished. The need for these is still required because the market cannot handle these aspects.

When this controversy was at its best some years ago, the workers’ argument was used to block change. It was said that both traders and workers need a day of rest. We are sure that every trader who knows his business can still get this day of rest. Many restaurants already use this system by not opening on Monday as they know that trade on that day is at its lowest.

Regarding the workers, everybody accepts that in today’s world, many activities need to go on. Previously it was only accepted that only certain categories of workers need to work on Sunday. As society changed, other categories were included. In the twenty first century, changes in lifestyles are indicating that this should now be extended also to these workers. With regard to their rights such as adequate compensation for the unsocial hours they have to work, I am sure that trade unions are able and willing to negotiate acceptable agreements and safeguard such rights, only if the workers themselves make the effort to join a trade union.

There is one final aspect. Whether we like it or not, we’re living in a market economy where competition, despite the efforts of those controlling markets, will exist because of new alternatives being developed. One such alternative which is having an increasing effect on local trade is internet shopping.

Looking at the local market, one finds that local consumers are aware that the prices found in local shops are higher than one finds them in other areas of the Single Market and which are accessible through internet. Moreover, from the statistics published, more Maltese are turning to shop through the internet. The local traders through their close contact with the political class can try to protect themselves against competition but they cannot completely control internet shopping.

Thus the local traders must be given the chance to operate at the best time that matches their own with those of consumers. The only way to do this is to liberalize the shopping hours for the benefit of both consumers and traders.

We realise that this change, like all others, may present some problems to shopkeepers and other retailers who employ staff, but we are sure that each can develop a system where the adverse effects are minimized and the benefits to both are maximised. We hope that eventually, the change of heart adopted by the GRTU will also filter to the Chamber of Commerce.

The only hitch there seems to be is that the government through restricting shops’ opening hours has found another convenient way of sucking up more finance from the economy to the detriment of both consumers and traders.

The charge of €700 for a one-day licence to open a retail outlet on a public holiday is both unjust and irrational and will put both the local trader and consumers at a disadvantage, because it makes trade more expensive for both.

Published on Maltastar.com 03rd June 2010

Jum il-Konsumaturi 2010 -Flusna, Drittijietna

Il-frażi ‘il-passat mhux garanzija tal-futur’ konna drajnieha mhux ħażin. Tiftaħ stazzjon tat-televiżjoni liema jkun u ma kinitx tgħaddi siegħa mingħajr ma tisma’ r-reklam ta’ xi bank jew aġenzija finanzjarja b’din il-frażi waqt li jħajrek tpoġġi dak li ġemmajt f’xi skema finanzjarja. Illum dawn ir-reklami kważi nixfu għal kollox.

X’ġara? Kulħadd jaf li dan kien riżultat tal-kriżi finanzjarja li laqtet lid-dinja ftit ta’ żmien ilu. Il-fatt li din il-kriżi ma tantx laqtet lis-settur finanzjarju Malti ma jfissirx li l-Maltin ma ntlaqtux. Intlaqtu għax ħafna mill-investiment li kien sar qabel kien fi swieq barranin peress li s-suq tagħna hu żgħir u l-ammont ta’ interessi li kien qed jagħti hu wieħed zgħir meta mqabbel ma’ dak li kont tista’ tikseb barra.

Din is-sena l-Consumers’ International għal Jum il-Konsumaturi għażlet it-tema ‘Flusna, Drittijietna’. Ir-raġuni prinċipali kienet li l-konsumaturi ntlaqtu tliet darbiet minn din il-kriżi. L-ewwel intlaqtu għaliex l-investimenti tagħhom rawhom jiżvintaw. Ħafna minn dawk li kellhom investiti sabu li mhux biss tilfu l-interessi iżda parti sostanzjali minn dak li kienu ġemmgħu.

It-tieni, il-konsumaturi f’pajjiżi oħra kellhom iħallsu wkoll permezz tat-taxxi tagħhom biex isalvaw il-banek u l-istituzzjonijiet li fallew.

Din kienet l-akbar parodija li kien hemm: li min kien imexxi l-banek u l-istituzzjonijiet finanzjarji ma ħarġu l-ebda ċenteżmu minn dawk is-somom kbar li kienu jieħdu f’salarji waqt li l-konsumaturi kellhom jagħmlu dan.

Tajjeb ngħidu li kien l-Istat li kellu jidħol biex jipprova jsalva s-sitwazzjoni. Ħadd minn dawk li kienu jmexxu dawn l-istituzzjonijiet finanzjarji ma daħħal idu fil-but biex jgħin.

L-istess ġara Malta. Ma smajna bl-ebda bank jew xi istituzzjoni li minnha l-konsumaturi Maltin tilfu, li għamlu xi ċaqliq jew tibdil biex fil-futur l-investimenti tal-konsumaturi jitħarsu. Hu għalhekk li f’pajjiżi oħra, speċjalment fir-Renju Unit u fl-Istati Uniti, hemm moviment mill-mexxejja tagħhom biex jibdew jikkontrollaw is-salarji fenomenali ta’ dawk li jmexxu l-banek u jdaħħlu aktar kontrolli fuq is-sistema finanzjarja.

It-tielet daqqa li ħadu l-konsumaturi kienet fil-qasam tax-xogħol. Il-kriżi finanzjarja kellha l-effetti tagħha li għadhom jinħassu sal-lum anki f’Malta. Din il-kriżi ssarrfet f’ammonti kbar ta’ telf ta’ impjiegi.

Kien għalhekk ukoll li l-ETUC mhix sodisfatta b’dak li qed jagħmlu l-gvernijiet Ewropej biex jassiguraw li t-tmexxija tal-kumpaniji, anki dawk l-istituzzjonijiet finanzjarji u l-banek, tissaħħaħ u ssir aktar responsabbli biex ma jmorrux għal profitti ta’ malajr filwaqt li jipperikolaw l-investimenti u d-depożiti tal-konsumaturi u l-impjiegi tal-ħaddiema.
Il-moviment tal-konsumaturi, min-naħa l-oħra, qed iressaq ukoll il-proposti tiegħu. Il-BEUC, il-Vuċi tal-Konsumaturi Ewropej, riċentament ħareġ dokument – Facing up to the Financial Crisis – fejn tressaq sett ta’ proposti konkreti.

Filwaqt li jpoġġi l-ħtija fuq in-nuqqas ta’ regolamenti u superviżjoni fuq is-sistemi finanzjarji, jgħid li l-konsumaturi huma l-grupp lanqas protett, hu l-grupp li għandu d-drittijiet tiegħu l-aktar miksura fit-tħaddim tas-sistema finanzjarja u li l-vuċi tiegħu l-inqas li tingħata importanza meta jittieħdu d-deċiżjonijiet.

Il-proposti mressqa mill-BEUC jinkludu:

•Regolamenti u superviżjoni effettiva fuq is-sistema;

•Informazzjoni aktar f’waqtha u sempliċi fuq il-prodotti finanzjarji;
•Pariri indipendenti;

•Self responsabbli;

•Protezzjoni ugwali fis-suq Ewropew;

•Tmexxija serja u responsabbli;

•Leġiżlazzjoni l-istess fuq financial intermediaries;

•Rimedji effettivi

F’Malta r-regolatur hu l-MFSA. Minkejja x-xogħol siewi mill-MFSA biex jgħinu l-konsumaturi Maltin, il-proposti li qed tressaq il-BEUC huma importanti għax ikomplu jserrħu ras il-konsumaturi lokali.

L-esperjenza qarsa li sofrew ħafna minnhom minħabba l-kriżi finanzjarja ġabet telf ta’ fiduċja kbira mill-konsumaturi fis-swieq finanzjarji u llum qed jibżgħu jixtru prodotti finanzjarji. Illum l-unika skemi li qed iħajru huma dawk fejn għallinqas għandek il-kapital assigurat.

Din il-biża’ qed tagħmilha aktar diffiċli biex il-konsumaturi jinvestu fis-sistema finanzjarja bil-konsegwenza li r-riċessjoni titwal. Biss din il-biża’ tista’ tingħeleb jekk il-konsumaturi jħossu li s-sistema qed taħdem bil-għaqal u li hemm ċerti garanziji.

Hu għalhekk li l-moviment tal-konsumaturi dinji u anki dak Ewropew qed iħeġġeġ biex jidħlu l-miżuri neċessarji biex il-konsumaturi jerġgħu jkollhom il-fiduċja biex ipoġġu dak li jġemmgħu fi skemi finanzjarji li jistgħu jġibu ġid sew lilhom u sew lis-sistema ekonomika kollha.

Published in Illum on 14^thMarch 2010

Flus, Drittijietna, Jum il-Konsumaturi, 2010

Il-krizi finanzjarja li laqtet id-dinja riċentament għadha qiegħda tħalli l-effetti tagħha. L-akbar effetti huma fuq il-konsumaturi, speċjalment dawk li raw it-tfaddil tagħhom jogħsfor mil-lejl għan-nhar. Fil-fatt hu stmat li l-akbar effett kellhom iħallsuh il-konsumaturi. Hu għalhekk li sew il-Consumers’ Interational u l-BEUC, il-vuċi tal-konsumaturi Ewropew adattaw din it-tema. Il-BEUC, min-naħa l-oħra ħarġet sett ta’ proposti. Dawn il-proposti jinkludu:

Regolamenti u superviżjoni effettiva fuq is-sistema finanzjarja
Hemm bżonn ta’ regoli Ewropej li jorbtu aktar il-banek u l-istituzzjonijiet finanzjarji għax l-aħħar kriżi wriet li dawn mhumiex kapaċi jikkontrollaw lilhom infushom. Prodotti finanzjarji ġodda hemm bżonn li jkunu evalwati għar-riskju li jġorru. Il-BEUC qiegħda titlob għal regolaturi aktar indipendenti u effettivi biex jaqdu dawn id-dmirijiet fost l-oħrajn:

Jaraw li r-reklamar ikun ġust u fih l-informazzjoni biex il-konsumaturi jkunu jistgħu jagħmlu għażliet tajba;

Jitwaqqfu prattiċi inġusti bħal prodotti marbuta ma’ xulxin;

Iwaqqfu sistema ta’ infor-mazzjoni biex javżaw lill-konsumaturi fuq ir-riskji li jġorru ċerti prodotti finanzjarji tul iż-żmien, speċjalment meta l-affarijiet ikunu sejrin ħażin.

Informazzjoni aktar f’waqtha u sempliċi fuq il-prodotti finanzjarji
L-informazzjoni għandha tkun miktuba b’mod sempliċi, b’mod li tindika r-riskju, l-volatilità u l-ispejjeż biex il-prodotti offruti jistgħu jkunu mqabbla. Ix-xogħol li qiegħda tagħmel CESR, Committee for European Securities Regulators, hu importanti. Il-metodu modern użat, speċjalment mill-banek hu li jipprovdulek pataflun ta’ informazzjoni teknika biex filwaqt li huma jkunu protetti, il-konsumatur xorta ma jifhem xejn u jkollu jiddependi ħafna drabi fuq pariri ta’ min qed imexxi l-istess prodotti.

Pariri indipendenti

Ir-regolaturi hemm bżonn li jinvestu biex ikun hemm minn jagħti pariri indipendenti bi prezz raġonevoli.

Self responsabbli
Hu importanti li l-bank li jkun qed jislef jassigura li l-konsumaturi jkunu kapaċi li jħallsu d-dejn li jagħmlu. Iżda hemm bżonn ukoll li jkun hemm limitu għal varjazzjoni tal-interessi.

Protezzjoni ugwali fis-suq Ewropew

Is-sistemi ta’ protezzjoni tad-depożiti (Deposit Guarantee Schemes) hemm bżonn li joffru l-istess protezzjoni u li dawn ikunu attrezzati biex iħallsu malajr. Hu b’hekk biss li l-konsumaturi jkunu jistgħu jgawdu mis-Suq Ewropew Wieħed. Dan jgħodd speċjalment għal Malta fejn is-suq hu żgħir u l-kompetizzjoni, speċjalment f’dan il-qasam, hi waħda limitata. Minħabba li ħafna skemi mhux iffinanzjati sew, hu l-konsumatur li qed ikollu jħallas għall-fallimenti permezz tat-taxxi tiegħu minflok l-operaturi stess kif titlob id-Direttiva.

Tmexxija serja u responsabbli

Hemm bżonn ta’ aktar superviżjoni stretta, barra li hemm bżonn ta’ aktar trasparenza u akkontabilità fil-ħlas tal-managers. Hemm il-ħtieġa li dawn il-ħlasijiet ikunu marbuta ma’ kif imorru l-investimenti fuq medda ta’ snin itwal.

Legiżlazzjoni l-istess fuq financial intermediaries

Il-BEUC tisħaq li hemm bżonn li l-ħlasijiet inizjali jispiċċaw filwaqt li hemm bżonn ta’ regoli uniformi fis-Suq Wieħed li jinkludu regoli dwar reġistrazzjoni, kwalifiki, trasparenza u insurance.

Rimedji
Hu kkalkolat li hemm madwar 40% tal-Ewropej li jemmnu li s-settur finanzjarju hu l-aktar wieħed diffiċli biex int tieħu rimedju minħabba li, speċjalment il-banek, għandhom riżorsi u diterminazzjoni biex jaqtgħu qalb il-konsumatur milli jieħu raġun. Għalhekk il-konsumaturi qiegħdin jitolbu biex tkun tista’ tittieħed azzjoni kollettiva (group action) f’dan il-qasam anki fuq livell komunitarju.

Hu żgur li dawn il-proposti se jsibu oppożizzjoni, speċjalment mill-banek u l-istituzzjo-nijiet l-oħra finanzjarji, bl-iskuża li issa l-inqas ħaġa li hemm bżonn hu regolamenti ġodda. L-argument ikompli li jekk isir hekk ir-riċessjoni tkompli.

Dan hu argument sabiħ għax b’hekk terġa’ tintalab il-logħba ta’ Wiċċ nirbaħ jien u Irġejjen titlef int. Dan għaliex li jkun ġara hu l-ewwel daħħluna fi kriżi, wara ħallasna għaliha aħna l-konsumaturi u issa jridu jerġgħu jibqgħu għaddejjin kif kienu biex jerġgħu jagħmlu qligħ kbir.

Jekk jiġri hekk, ikun ifisser li ma tgħallimna xejn.

Nittamaw li dan il-jum ma jkunx bħall-oħrajn

Ħafna paroli sabiħ f’dan il-jum u wara ninsew kollox. Jekk verament nemmnu li rridu nħarsu d-drittijiet tal-konsumaturi nużaw dan il-jum biex dawk li b’xi mod jistgħu jinfluwenzaw id-deċiżjonijiet sew lokalment u sew fuq livell Ewropew, jadottaw dawn il-proposti tal-moviment Ewropew tal-konsumaturi biex verament niddefendu l-konsumaturi.

Published in it-Torca on 14^thMarch 2010

Consumer Rights Day 2010 – Our Money, Our Rights

This year’s theme for the Consumer Rights Day chosen by the Consumers’ International focuses on how consumers have fared recently within the financial sector. All know that the main losers of the recent financial crisis were the consumers who not only saw their investments evaporate but had to pay through their taxes to stop this crisis. In Iceland, where most of the banking sector collapsed, the taxpayers are not only being asked to pay to salvage the economic system but each person is being asked to pay $135 per month for 8 years in order to pay for the money lost by English and Dutch depositors.

In Malta, though we didn’t experience any bank failure, many consumers saw their savings being washed away after investing in supposedly good solid funds being sold by our local banks. BEUC, the European Consumers’ Voice, has issued a report on the situation. This report pins the main reason on the under-regulated and under-supervised financial systems which put immediate financial rewards before companies’ stability and risk evaluation.

It also points out that the main losers were the consumers whose interests are rarely taken into consideration in this sector. In order to protect consumers and restore their confidence in the financial sector, BEUC put out a package of measures. These measures include:

Financial supervision and regulation – there must be more powerful and independent national supervisors with powers to control effectively advertising, financial information and unfair practices such as bundled and tied products). These supervisors should also set up an early warning system to inform consumers of the risk category of various financial products. BEUC is also asking for more binding rules at EU level as soft law or self-regulation in this sector has failed dismally.

Pre-Contractual information on financial products and services – we need pre-contractual information which should be short and easily understandable to consumers. The model which is being developed by CESR, the Committee of European Securities Regulators, should provide a good basis. This model indicates whether or not the invested capital is guaranteed, the investment volatility and the suggested retention period.

Financial advice – The need for an independent advice is more needed nowadays. Advice is generally given by financial service providers and is often not targeted to consumers’ needs and expectations but rather linked to the banks’ commercial practices, thus creating a conflict of interest. BEUC is suggesting the funding of independent advisors to ensure that the product matches the MiFID (Markets in Financial Instruments Directive) profile of the consumer.

Responsible lending – Lenders should ascertain that the consumers have the necessary capacity. On the other hand, interest rates should be capped while promotional rates should be prohibited.

Deposit Guarantee Schemes – These schemes should be equally guaranteed across Europe to ensure that consumers are encouraged to seek the best opportunities within the Single Market. Payout procedures should be efficient and timely while the schemes themselves should be robust to ensure that if there is a market failure, it is the operators themselves, as required by the EU Directive, who pays. The past experience showed that it was the consumer who paid up for the shortcomings of the banks and the financial operators.

Corporate Governance – strict rules and supervision must be developed to ensure that financial institutions behave responsibly while there should be transparency and accountability of managers’ remuneration.

Harmonisation of legislation – one particular area where there is urgent need of harmonisation is on financial intermediaries. In this area there is a need to limit the initial commissions and introduce rules on registration, qualification, transparency, liability and insurance.

Redress – a sizeable percentage (39%) of European consumers believe that the financial services sector is the most difficult in which one can obtain redress. This is understandable given the resources that this sector can muster. In order to try to obtain a balance, BEUC is proposing the adoption of Group Action procedure at both national and cross-border level. The other proposal is that redress procedures be simplified.

The above should provide an action programme for all those who are aware of the great imbalance that consumers face in this sector. We hope that all those in power will use this year’s World Consumers’ Day to subscribe to the above programme of action. We believe it is high time that these start putting their money where their mouth is as it is the only way to rekindle consumers’ trust in such a vital sector.

Published on Maltastar.com on 15^th March 2010

A consumers’ Agenda (ii)

During the first part of this article, I pointed out a very high priority that would ensure consumer rights. This priority is to ensure increase in competition in the local markets. I focused on e-commerce as one very important way to induce competition into the local markets and to ensure that the benefits of competition are transferred to the consumers.

Throughout this article, I shall focus on a local structure which is supposed to ensure fair competition, and also address the issue of consumer redress. I shall concentrate on the Fair Competition and Consumers’ Affairs Division however, and discuss how this Division can be improved. If there is one thing that both political parties seem to agree on, it is that we need a new Consumers’ Agency.

Should this be a government department or should it be an authority? If we look at the experience we had with other authorities, I seriously doubt that we need another such authority as the large majority of these act just like any other government department. The only difference is that we are paying much more for such authorities and are still getting the same result.

But should it be this way? I believe that things can be very different with a little bit of political will and professionalism.

I believe that such an agency should operate as an authority, i.e. operate within the framework of government policy but independent of government. It should also be proactive. By its very nature it should be a regulatory structure to ensure that markets open up and competition is for the benefit of consumers.

To ensure this, the legislation should give more independence to this Agency than it is presently giving to many authorities. If we merely give such an Agency similar legislation to what is, for example, given to MRA, we only get another MRA, i.e., another government rubberstamp.

Though legislation is necessary, it is not sufficient. There are certain other requirements which are necessary for such an Agency to be able to meet the objectives stated above. One such requisite is the orientation of the person leading such an Agency. Let me make myself clear. I do not mean political orientation, as I am sure that the government will ensure that the person leading such an Agency will be sympathetic, to say the least, with the government of the day. But this does not necessarily mean that this Agency will be a rubber stamp. If the person has enough political clout, is professional in his/her duties, and is committed to ensure greater competition which will benefit the consumer, then I am sure that such a person will deliver.

I am speaking from experience. During the time I was representing the local consumer association, I met a small number of such persons, one of whom was Mr Joseph Tabone, who was Chairman of the Malta Communications Authority. During my contacts with him as Chairman, I could see that though he was operating within government policy, he was also ensuring that the local consumer would benefit. One such benefit that emerged from our encounters, was that when we discussed the introduction of itemized telephone billing, he agreed and, in spite of the obstinate opposition of the then Telemalta, his determination and professionalism succeeded in winning the day for consumers.

When I mentioned orientation above, I was referring to the mindset that those leading such an authority should have. Going through the websites of both the local Division and the Office of Fair Trading, I was struck by the difference relating to the objectives of these two institutions. The objective looks similar, but I believe that fundamentally it is different. Whereas the local objective was “Protecting the proper functioning of the market for consumers and traders alike”, the OFT’s objective was “Making markets work well for consumers”. The fundamental difference is that whereas the Division’s objectives is to ensure the proper functioning of the market, implying that the main objective is to see that the market is a level playing field for business, the OFT’s objective is to see that the benefits of the market are transferred to consumers. This is a marked difference, as the objective is not only to have competition, but to ensure that the benefits end up in consumers’ pockets.

As I already mentioned, autonomy from the government is essential. There are two reasons. First, in Malta the basic utility markets depend on the government. Observe the inertia and the resistance of the Division to get involved in the present and past water and electricity tariff saga. Second, this Agency needs to be independent of any political influence especially one in favour of the local business. We all know the great connections that exist between business and the local political class. A case in point was when some time ago the Division believed that an advert was not within the limits of the present legislation. It issued a statement. The firm - a communications one - rebutted the allegations. Suddenly there was complete silence. Why? I very much doubt that the Division’s stand was incorrect as I am sure that before issuing their statement they did their homework well. One can imagine what happened.

I believe that in order to secure such autonomy it would be very helpful if such an Agency be transparent and accountable not to a particular Minister but directly to Parliament. To ensure both transparency and accountability, such an Agency must be reviewed by a Parliamentary Committee so that Parliament would be able to devote as much time as is necessary, thereby, ensuring that this Agency would be achieving its aims.

One last point. One also needs to look at other complementary structures. We simply cannot have the Agency and the Consumer Affairs Council having nearly the same functions. We need to decide what function the latter should have. Once we decide about these functions, we need to ensure that it has the resources to achieve such functions and also be transparent and accountable, not to the Minister but to the local consumers.

Published on Maltastar 26th February 2010
http://bbb84.blogspot.com/

A consumers’ agenda for 2010 (i)

Consumers have been the pawns in the political game. When one needs to bolster his political ground, consumers top the agenda. This happens in all elections. Unfortunately, soon after the election result is published, the consumers are generally the first to top the line to be faced with austerity measures.

But apart from the political games, consumers face some permanent difficulties. Ideally they should be treated as royalty especially if we are to adopt the maxim ‘The consumer is king’. More pragmatically, what the consumers really crave for is to have a fair deal. The common day experience is much more sober. What can be learned from such experience to draw up an agenda?

The consumer is king when there is a very competitive market. Malta by its very nature is small and though they say that small is beautiful, it is creates a very restrictive market for competition. What can be done?

There are several factors which can be dealt with locally but there are external forces which can really mould the local market. One such thing is e-commerce. One market which during the last few years has been recently influenced by internet is the book market. Mind you, like any other factor the effects can be both positive and negative. The negative side is that we practically finished up with a local monopoly in this sector. On the other side, local book prices have decreased because the local monopolies are facing direct and effective competition from such firms as Play.com. Some years ago, the local price of an imported book marked £5 in the UK usually was Lm5 even though the exchange rate was heavily in favour of the Malta Lira. Today due to the fact that many Maltese are buying their books from internet, prices have decreased substantially.

We can expect similar effects on other markets if e-commerce continues to increase. Unfortunately, such progress brought about a negative response from the local importers. Their economic siege mentality is still strong. One way of preventing e-commerce is through going into franchise agreements. In this way, they prevent e-commerce for the products they import as the foreign internet site will not be available to Maltese consumers.

Such a strategy makes also sense to the mother company as it is able to continue market segmentation in spite of the idea of the Single Market. Through such a strategy, firms would be able to charge different prices to their benefit. As such, such a situation is also worrying to many other consumer groups in the EU and pressure is mounting for some action at EU level. Such a situation is really making a mockery of the idea of a Single European Market.

Fortunately, I believe that local consumer will find an ally at the EU level when John Dalli will take over as Commissioner for Health and Consumer Affairs. In spite of the fact that such an issue does not fall directly under his responsibility, as it falls under DG Market, I am sure that Mr Dalli will use his Office to push for the resolution of such an issue.

I take this opportunity to wish Mr Dalli success in his new Office. I am sure that Mr Dalli will push to ensure that the Single Market will become a reality through greater competition to the benefit of consumers especially in such European ‘isolated’ communities like Malta.