With tongue firmly in cheek, Labour MP Joe Brincat told Parliament that for many Maltese there were two kinds of saints, those who helped them recover from an illness, and those who help them become "invalid".
He was speaking during the debate on amendments to the Social Security Act, during which several MPs complained about people abusively receiving invalidity benefits.
The Bill tightens the eligibility criteria for invalidity pensions and also gives new powers to the Benefit Fraud Investigation Directorate.
Dr Brincat, speaking "with respect" and without wishing to raise a controversy of Danish proportions, said everyone knew about the saints of the earth who turned the healthy into the invalid and those who milked the invalidity pensions system.
There was even a case in the past where a person was boarded out from the civil service but was fit enough to represent a whole constituency in Parliament.
He said that social services and social solidarity meant that those who could afford to support those who needed assistance. This was everyone's moral obligation. But one should not be allowed to operate a system exactly as it suited him because this was theft.
Dr Brincat urged the minister, Dolores Cristina, to further refine the details of the law, saying that there could be loopholes in the way it was written and these would lead people to go round the law rather than breach it directly, getting away with it. This should be prevented because there were many people who genuinely needed help. It was useless to have certain rules, which would only be effective in theory.
Malta was a small country where everyone knew everyone else and sometimes it made sense for an independent opinion to be sought from a foreigner. Malta twinned with other countries on insignificant issues. Was there a possibility of twinning also on this issue for certain assessments to be really independent?
While the Bill needed to be refined, Dr Brincat said the minister deserved to be congratulated for seeking to introduce measures which were needed, but which would not make her popular.
Earlier in the debate, Mario Galea (PN) said it was incongruous that even as health services improved, the number of people applying for an invalidity pension had risen. Some 9,000 people were receiving invalidity pensions, at a cost to taxpayers of Lm16 million. Part of the rise clearly could be explained by abuse. A strata of privileged people who received a pension while working in the black economy had been created. This situation underlined the need for this Bill, whose purpose was to ensure that welfare funds were directed to those who really needed them.
It was also simply unacceptable that all people granted invalidity pensions were boarded out for life. This meant rewarding laziness under the guise of welfare.
Mr Galea said he agreed with Joe Cassar (PN) on the risk of burnout faced by some professions, such as nurses and doctors. The symptoms of burnout needed to be recognised and acknowledged so that they could be tackled.
He said that the Bill and the proposed reform were proof that this government was an agent of change. It was on the side of the people because it was only the few who abused the system.
Michael Gonzi (PN) said that at the opening of the debate the minister had spoken on matters which were not found in the Bill.
The minister had also spoken of how the number of applications for invalidity benefits had risen sharply in Malta. There was no denying that there was some abuse in Malta, but the problems found here were common to other countries, such as Cyprus, Ireland and Italy.
Dr Gonzi asked why applicants for invalidity benefit would have to wait for a long period before they would start receiving payments and only those who were really poor would end up receiving a benefit after months of pleading. What income would they have until their application was approved? Who would decide on fast tracking and who could apply?
What was mentioned by the minister but was not found in the Bill was a system of points which a person would have to have in order to be eligible for invalidity benefits. Such guidelines would be very important for doctors.
Dr Gonzi underlined the important role of doctors and proper medical examination for an assessment of invalidity pension applications. He defended the current medical board system, pointing out that the board members were selected from a pool of doctors who were asked to serve on different boards. They did not know beforehand on which board they would serve and who they would examine, meaning there was no grounds for clientelism.
The allegations of abuse, therefore, could not be blamed on the medical board.
Dr Gonzi also stressed that the doctors who wrote medical certificates would know the problems and circumstances of their patients. The people who read such certificates should not become slaves of documentation and figures but they should see the whole picture.
It was for this reason that the points system the minister had spoken about should have formed part of the bill and come before Parliament. This would be a good system, as long as one did not need to be practically dead to be eligible for benefits.
Dr Gonzi asked about the functions of the Medical Review Board and suggested that the applicants' GP should be invited to help the board and the patient.
He also asked whether an applicant would have a right for appeal on medical grounds when an application for an invalidity benefit was refused. And would the appeal be heard before the same board?
Dr Gonzi praised the government for its determination to stamp out benefit abuse but said the medical profession should not be blamed for what was wrong in the current system.
Franco Galea (PN) said the state should use the iron fist against those who received benefits abusively. The state needed those funds to help other sectors, such as persons with disability.
The Nationalist MP urged the government to plug abuse in the way ID cards were issued. Doctors should be held personally responsible for medical certificates they signed and people found unsuitable for particular work should be retrained for other activities.