Calling a spade a spade

Social housing estates can be another form of ghettoisation. The construction of social housing estates in today's society is passé.

Calling a spade a spade in politics is a very challenging exercise. It is not always encouraged or appreciated. It is not the first time that political spin takes over. Trying hard to appease staunch party supporters is not that difficult to do. The challenge is to attract the middle-of-the-road voters, which fortunately are on the increase. Beyond partisan rhetoric and political insecurity, I have no problem stating that the Budget for 2016 contains a number of good initiatives. This view is shared by a number of constituted bodies. Tax exemption for minimum wage earners is commendable.

Reducing Vat on sports activities is another good decision. Opening of child centres, investment in alternative energy, regularisation of irregular migrants’ work, and work benefits for low earners are among other good initiatives. As a councillor myself for St Julian’s, I applaud the new environmental contribution fund for tourists. I encourage the government to go further and pass a percentage of this revenue to local councils.

In the same spirit of calling spade a spade, the Budget for 2016 has also a good number of half-baked measures and ill-advised initiatives. As a person working within the social field, I will limit myself to mention briefly a few examples.

My first concern is that the government still upholds the socialist ethos, that of giving ‘alms to poor’. According to the latest statistics, Malta has 100,000 persons in risk of poverty and the highest cost of living in the EU.

While money can be part of the solution, it is not the ultimate solution. We need to address the causes of poverty rather than tackling poverty itself. The Budget failed to tackle, for example, illiteracy and school absenteeism – two key issues that can break the vicious cycle of poverty.

We need to tackle poverty through a holistic empowerment care plan tailor-made to the needs of the individual concerned. Synergy of all stakeholders is a must. The Budget failed to address this holistic approach.

Another half-baked measure is that the government proposes to pay half of the minimum wage of a qualified carer engaged by an elderly person. Does this exclude the non-EU carers, many not qualified but still providing a sterling service?

If an elderly joins this scheme, he/she will be removed from the waiting list for government residential homes. Is this some ‘smart’ way to reduce the waiting list? What happens if an elderly is not in a position to pay anymore or needs to be admitted to a residential home due to increasing dependency? How about increasing more community support services instead?

Regarding disabled persons, the government is proposing the setting up of a disability hub. Beyond government’s spin, this hub can easily lead to the ghettoisation of disabled persons. Although the proposed plans may have a good design, the hub will still remain a segregated venue, even if it is open to the public.

A state-of-the-art hospital still remains a hospital. Likewise, a disabled hub always remains a place for disabled people. Over the years, there was wide consensus that disabled people should be integrated into mainstream society. Is this a retro measure? The opening of community sheltered apartments is a step in the right direction. But I fail to see why the government is saying that this is a first.

During my tenure as CEO at the Housing Authority, the Authority provided community apartments to various NGOs such as the Richmond Foundation and Sapport. Another budgetary measure is the exemption of the stamp duty for first-time buyers. Beyond government’s spin, few failed to notice that this measure has pushed up prices for apartments. I would have preferred that the government retained the previous scheme of subsidising the home loans.

As regards social housing, while a €50 million investment was mentioned, there is no line item in the budget estimates. Social housing estates can be another form of ghettoisation. The construction of these estates in today’s society is passé. Without being misunderstood, most people on the waiting list are people with various social difficulties. Grouping them together can worsen their situation. One also needs to include the maintenance costs that the government will face over the years.

The way forward is to heavily subsidise beneficiaries to rent or buy from the private sector. The Budget failed also to address an acute problem of mobility within the social housing estates. Elderly tenants are being ‘imprisoned’ in their own apartments due to a lack of lifts – a must for elderly.

My overall assessment is that although the Budget has good measures, it failed to tackle other social themes, such as new forms of addictions, children in care and youth issues, fostering, health prevention, problems with multi-culturalism and domestic violence among others. Other crucial sectors, such as traffic management (the elephant in the room), the role of local councils, new niches for investment, environment, animal welfare, agriculture and fisheries were also not given their due importance.

(This article was published on Times of Malta – 30 October, 2015)