Charity: supplementing the welfare state

We are long past the day when charity was the only help available for those in need and the vulnerable! Over the past days I have come across a number of comments on the social media pointing out that if we pay taxes there is no room for charity. These comments emphasise that our taxes, funding the welfare state, should be enough to assist those in need and the vulnerable. Unfortunately, reality is quite a different matter, as we can see day in day out.

The welfare state may be just enough for the average person. But it is not sufficient, as no one fits the average person!  The welfare state, as most other state initiatives, is generally a one size fits all exercise, supplemented in specific circumstances.

Individual and institutional charitable acts and initiatives supplement and buttress the welfare state. This has been going on for years. In fact, charity and charitable institutions preceded the advent of social services by many years.  Unfortunately, it has been identified, over the years, that a number of people slip through the protective net of the welfare state. In such instances charity and the initiatives of charitable institutions are indispensable.

Christmas time, the solidarity season, is when all this comes to the fore. L-Istrina on Boxing Day, the Franciscan soup kitchen initiative in Valletta, the Siġġiewi Dar tal-Providenza, Hospice Malta and Puttinu Cares are some of the very worthy charitable initiatives which over the years have bridged the gap and reached many of the neglected corners of social needs in Malta.

It is right to supplement the welfare state in the short term. However, in the longer term, the welfare state should be tweaked in order that its reach is extended to the neglected corners which are identified from time to time.

One can say that, in a sense, charity and charitable institutions are the red light which indicate areas where the welfare state has so far failed to make a difference.

Personalisation of welfare, when this is possible, generally makes the difference on the effectiveness of welfare.

Consider, for example, the Franciscan soup kitchen initiative which has been launched in the past months in Valletta.  It started off as a soup kitchen providing a hot meal to those who need it: some 90 persons every day. The availability of facilities for taking a shower as well as the services of a psychologist are being added, as a result addressing this basic neglect of human dignity which our effluent society has developed. In the process it may be possible to identify, and in some cases address the root cause as a result of which, some of us are not being protected by the welfare net.

L-Istrina on Boxing Day funds the Community Chest Fund, now incorporated as a foundation. The Community Chest Fund, under the direction of the Presidency of the Republic, throughout the year supplements the gaps of the health authorities, primarily through funding expensive medication and supplementing the assistance received from the state by those seeking medical treatment abroad.

Apparently, I am informed, the Community Chest Fund is no longer distributing white goods nor is it offering scholarships. Fortunately, the Presidency has the capability of learning through the mistakes of its past occupants.

On the other hand, the health authorities should pull their socks and start shouldering the expense due for these expensive medicines. Is not this why taxes are paid? Should the health service be reliant on charitable donations in the long run?

This leads to one crucial issue: taxation.  Parliamentary political parties have for some years been competing in dishing out promises of tax reductions. It has to be underlined that without adequate funding the welfare state cannot keep up with the needs of the vulnerable and the neglected amongst us.

Taxes have to be reasonable but they have to be collected.  Addressing adequately tax evasion, including that encouraged by the state, would go a long way in funding the welfare state gaps.

This would not eliminate the need for charity and charitable institutions. They are here to stay, being an integral part of our society. Rather, they will have more time and resources to identify and address other areas which the welfare state, inadvertently, ignores or neglects.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday: 2 January 2022

Beyond solidarity

Earlier this week the government and Puttinu Cares Foundation signed an important agreement.

As a result, the National Social and Development Fund will apply €5 million of its funds to assist in the purchasing of more apartments by the foundation to further its objective of assisting cancer patients undergoing treatment in London. This is indeed commendable.

I say this notwithstanding being aware of the origin of the funds accumulated in the National Social and Development Fund as a result of the detestable golden passports scheme. Known as the Individual Investment Programme, this scheme selling passports and citizenship is objectionable on a point of principle. Using the funds which it generates for solidarity measures will not sanitise it.

Earlier, during the month of August, the Ministry for Social Solidarity made €1 million of public funds available to the Hospice Movement to help it in its support services both to patients suffering terminal illness as well as their relatives.

Last year it was the Farsons Foundation and its affiliates who assisted the Hospice Movement through a €115,000 donation towards the establishment of the St Michael Hospice, the first state-of-the-art complex in Malta which will be dedicated entirely to providing comprehensive palliative care.

The St Michael Hospice is to be developed instead of the former Adelaide Cini Institute which the Church in Malta handed over to Hospice Malta. Archbishop Scicluna, in launching this Church initiative, stated that it was inspired by the Year of Mercy proclaimed by Pope Francis in 2015.

It is indeed heartening to know that Maltese society in general has its heart in the right place and is capable of acting to alleviate suffering and also to assist, whenever possible, in the recovery of those who can make this journey. All of us have a loved one who was or still is in the shadows of cancer.

Being capable of acting in this way is commendable. We can, however, in addition to all this strive to avoid, as much as possible, such suffering.

Adopting adequate environmental policies and ensuring that they are observed would undoubtedly, in the long term, avoid the incidence of a good percentage of terminal illnesses.

Launching the Beating Cancer Plan earlier this year, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that “Even though 30 to 40 per cent of all cancers are preventable, only 3 per cent of health budgets are invested in prevention strategies”. Is it not time that we put our heads together to address this anomaly?

Medical screening does wonders and has saved many lives, even in Malta. All would however agree that this is not enough.

Reducing environmental risk factors such as all forms of pollution and exposure to chemicals would be a good first step together with the improvement of access to healthy diets and the further promotion of vaccinations.

Within this context, in my opinion, the reluctance to act decisively on the use of pesticides in agriculture is of extreme concern. I am informed that in this day and age we still do not have the necessary facilities available locally to be able to examine and test agricultural products in order to determine the pesticide residue which they retain. Still having to send agricultural samples for testing to overseas laboratories makes a mockery of our ability to apply the EU regulatory setup intended to protect each and every one of us.

When results of tests carried out to agricultural samples selected for pesticide residue testing are available this will be generally too late as the products potentially laced with pesticides would have been sold and most probably consumed.

Limiting ourselves to pesticide use and abuse we need an adequate regulatory setup as a result of which pesticides would no longer be sold over the counter but through a prescription-type system and regulated by qualified agricultural pharmacists. Our farmers should be trained in the proper use of pesticides and not be left to their own devices.  Together with a rigorous sampling and testing policy buttressed with a locally run laboratory we could in the medium term start the process of prevention of pesticide-induced illness.

Acting through adequate control of use of pesticides is just one step. The consistent application of sensible environmental policy across the board would yield better results entrenching prevention as the preferred option in our health strategy.

This would take us a big step beyond solidarity, as prevention is definitely better than cure.

published in The Malta Independent on Sunday : 15 November 2020