The government came in for criticism yesterday for having failed to move legislation on domestic violence and for not having regulated child minding services.

The criticism was made by Labour MP Helena Dalli when parliament debated a bill to amend the Social Security Bill.

Replying, Parliamentary Secretary Dolores Cristina said the drafting of a law on domestic violence was in its final stages at the Office of the Attorney General and she expected to receive the final version shortly.

Social Policy Minister Lawrence Gonzi said at the opening of the debate on Monday evening that this was a temporary amendment in view of sweeping changes that needed to be made to the law in the near future.

One part of the bill would do away with any inequality between men and women vis-à-vis social security benefits. Another difference was between a woman who lived with her husband, on the one side, and all other strata of Maltese society. The latter were obliged to pay national insurance contributions, but the married woman could not.

Those who had no independent income from self-occupation (not self-employed) would join others with independent income in having an option of whether or not to pay national insurance contributions.

Dr Karl Chircop (MLP) said the opposition agreed with the proposed amendment, which also reflected a new sensitivity to such issues. The only pity was the fact that the matter had been brought to a head by the EU reality.

The inadequacy of the social security law was a worrying factor, and its ambiguities often caused problems. The law as a whole needed to be reviewed as a matter of urgency, if only to do away with bureaucracy.

Only a few weeks ago he had received a letter from an individual complaining of a small number of unemployed who, because of an anomaly in the law, were being denied unemployment benefits if they still lived with their parents. Giving this small group their due would certainly not involve a huge expense.

Opposition leader Alfred Sant said it was ironic that at a time when everyone needed to focus more on women who were being discriminated against in various situations, the government was focusing on a smaller number of women in a different situation just because the EU demanded it. There should be a greater sense of balance.

Even the way laws were worded discriminated against women. This amendment should have been part of a much bigger framework. Unfortunately the government had failed to attach much significance to appeals for greater gender equality. These government actions were making the issue of gender discrimination fade into insignificance. Instead, it should be tackled with a frontal attack from the top down, not through rhetoric but in deed.

Malta had not done as much as other countries with regard to women's access to executive positions. Even the almost total presence of men in parliament led to laws being largely worded without keeping women in mind.

There were a lot of things that Malta could do under its own steam to lessen gender discrimination, without being prodded by the EU. They would result in fully tapping the human resources available to the country even among women, concluded Dr Sant.

Labour MP Helena Dalli, speaking when the debate resumed yesterday, said there was a lot which the government could have done to improve the Social Security Act. Among them were ways to solve problems faced by women who had needed to interrupt their careers to raise their families and were unable to pay back social security contributions so as not to have an interruption for pension eligibility purposes.

There were also cases where a number of women in self employment could only work for a few hours per week. These people ended up paying more in social security contributions than they actually earned, and this was discouraging them from working.

It was not enough to amend the laws, however, and there was need for administrative changes. What had become of the Layton Report on the presence of women in civil service decision-making posts? Clearly there was need for the civil service to increasingly make use of the potential of women within it.

Mrs Dalli said she could not understand why it was taking the government so long to move legislation on battered wives, given the urgent need for it. The situation was currently such that it was battered wives who were being forced out of their homes instead of the aggressors. According to promises made by Dr Gonzi, this law should have been enacted two years ago.

When would the child minding sector be regulated? To add insult to injury, at the last budget, the government promised a subsidy to low-income families who sent their children to licensed nurseries. Yet no nursery had been licensed.

Concluding, Mrs Dalli said there were too few women on government boards.

Parliamentary Secretary Dolores Cristina referred to Mrs Dalli's remarks and pointed out that Dr Gonzi at the opening of the debate had said this was a temporary amendment until a sweeping reform of the law was made.

She said one of the purposes of this bill was to ensure that a married woman living with her husband would not be precluded from voluntarily paying her NI contributions while other strata of society were expected to do it. This would put everybody on the same level.

The government was not ignoring new realities, such as the fact that modern women were demanding flexible working hours, child-minding facilities and other such benefits.

At a meeting with four male senior executives of the Malta Employers' Association she had discussed the need for a greater percentage of women in the labour market. Employers seemed worried about the benefits that women were expecting - a far cry from the fact that up to some years ago these issues were not even raised.

Mrs Cristina said she agreed with Mrs Dalli on the wish to see more women forming part of government boards, and was proud of the support given by Dr Gonzi in this area. Facts had proved that a mix of genders and ideas went a long way towards achieving progress.

The issue of quotas for women's involvement in various areas of international society was a very sensitive one. Setting such quotas for national elections, for example, could be dangerous because it could be manipulated by parties to win more seats. Locally, the concept also had to be studied on the basis of the constitution and the electoral law.

There was nothing to stop individual parties setting aside a number of candidatures for women. Indeed, she was more concerned by the small number of women contesting elections than by the small number of women in parliament. The main stumbling blocks were tradition and culture.

On domestic violence Mrs Cristina said she had met the Attorney-General and been assured that the drafting of the bill was almost complete.

She said all the necessary attention would be given to benefits, privileges and incentives to women, but above all the right for all women to a pension in recognition of their work for their families.

Ms Marie Louise Coleiro (MLP) said the bill could not be seen as simply a small window on the general situation. Championing the rights of women was important in the context of championing society in general, of which women were an important part.

Like Mrs Cristina she regularly met women who could give Maltese society very valid contributions, but they were held back by the general scenario. She also agreed that the quality of women candidates was just as important as the number of women MPs.

Several women were not financially independent, or were worried about who would mind their children while they went on the political campaign trail. While such great investment was being made in women's education, even at university level, they quietly faded out of the scene as they opted for motherhood.

Ms Coleiro also referred to the plight of battered women and said access to legal aid needed to be improved. It would be better for the individual to be able to choose her lawyer, who would then be paid by the state according to the established tariffs.

Winding up, Dr Gonzi reiterated that the government was involved in an exercise that would result in far-reaching changes to the social security set-up.

The social dimension went hand-in-hand with the financial dimension, which was largely responsible for the prevailing situation. This did not mean that all possible steps should not be taken to make the Maltese family ever stronger while women were given all the opportunities to better their standing in life.

It was evident that the impact of the various measures that had been taken in favour of women on the labour market, through the consensus of all social partners, had not yet been fully grasped by all. The new employment relations law had been a milestone and proved that the leader of the opposition was wrong to say on Monday that the government had done nothing for gender equality. The gender equality law, also moved by this government, was another example.

Dr Gonzi agreed with Dr Chircop that the current social security law badly needed review and simplification. It was not something that could have been achieved with the bill under debate.

It was true that certain unemployed qualified for relief after six months of unemployment benefit and then stopped receiving benefits if they lived with their parents. It was important that steps to rectify such situations did not result in incentives for people to stay at home rather than incentives to go to work. It all boiled down to how prepared the nation was to take the decisions that needed to be taken, tough as they might be.

The bill was then given a second reading.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.