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/