Tame lies and vicious ones

Every week is heralding more good economic news. I would like to pause a while on the employment statistics.

It used to be said that the level of unemployment is the thermometer with which we measure the economy's temperature. We know from experience that this is not entirely and always true. The developed economies have experienced jobless growth: In plain terms, economic expansion without a corresponding growth in the number of the gainfully occupied or a drop in the number of the unemployed. For some time, economists were speaking of structural unemployment. I understand by the term a mismatch of skills and opportunities brought about by the loss of competitiveness in traditional labour-intensive industries and the rise of the new capital-intensive new industries.

We are successfully passing through this phase in our own country. Since the very beginning, the Gonzi government had diagnosed the ailment and prescribed more investment and better investment in education as the key cure. It did not start from scratch. It had a solid base in the previous Nationalist governments' investment in the whole educational system, from kindergarten to university. But it is to the merit of this government that it focused more on education as an investment in our only resource: Our human resources. It endeavoured with increasing success to make education and industry to work more closely.

The fruit of this policy is already being harvested in abundance. The number of full-time employees is at an all-time record, besides an unprecedented steep increase in those working only part-time.

The number registering for work on Part I and Part II of the register in June this year decreased by 724, when compared with that of June 2006. The number of those registering under Part I fell by 900 to 5,701, the lowest in 12 years, at the peak of the boom of the 1990s. Those registering under Part II rose by 176.

While those who register under Part I are new job seekers, re-entrants in the labour market or those who have lost their job, those who register under Part II have been dismissed on disciplinary grounds, left their jobs of their own free will or had refused work offered or training opportunities. Quite a number were not allowed to register under Part I because they were caught red handed working while registering for work.

Though one cannot be too categorical and there are genuine people who have to leave their job for health and other valid reasons, anyone can tell which part of the register comprises the more bona fide job seekers.

I was curious how the legion of gloom and doom would look at the good tidings. Labour spokesmen kept mum. I searched for the reporting of this news item in l-orizzont (July 27) without bothering to look in the first or last page. Good economic news under a Nationalist government is no good news for these self-styled defenders of the workers. I found a little paragraph on page two. Surprise! Surprise! The inconspicuous headline ran Unemployment Under Part II On The Increase. Not an outright lie. But not the whole truth either! The defenders of skivers, malingerers and shirkers! Defence of the Labour Party's interests first and foremost!

Far more serious are the lies about the elderly at SVPR. The Labour Party, whether old or new, has nothing to brag about at this institution. In their time, it was a ghetto reminiscent of Dickensian times, where the needy elderly were dumped only to be remembered just before election time when pictures of the Sacred Heart and Labour candidates together with goodies were freely distributed among these senior citizens. This, together with judicious or open threats and other corrupt practices, used to result in a close to a 100 per cent vote for Labour.

Our senior citizens were given their dignity only on the return of the 1987 Nationalist Administration. A parliamentary secretary for the elderly was for the first time created. Labour played down and even pooh-poohed this innovative measure.

Thanks to John Rizzo Naudi and Antoine Mifsud Bonnici, the culture of caring for the elderly was revolutionised. More recently, their good work was continued by Frans Agius and Helen D'Amato. A new national policy about the elderly was established. Today it is accepted by all. The elderly should live in the community as long as possible, but when the time comes and institutionalisation is inevitable they deserve the best. The institute's change of name to SVPR proved anything but cosmetic. The standards were raised so that, bit by bit, the stigma was eliminated once and for all.

Ward after ward was modernised beyond recognition, so much so that Labour started accusing us that SVPR and ZCH, which was also established by us, were an example of our profligacy. These were unaffordable luxuries. Today, the mentality of the people has changed so much that they have changed their tune. They profusely shed crocodile tears for the elderly climaxing in the vicious lie that five elderly had died due to the excessive heat during the June heat wave. During that week six died in air-conditioned wards.

We have denied more than once that anyone was certificated to have died of hyperthermia. In vain! They repeated this lie ad nauseam. Little do they care that they may cause distress to the most frail in our society! They deem it a small price to pay as long as the Nationalist government is depicted as a heartless regime!

Last Sunday, Alfred Sant himself took up the cause. He did not seem convinced because he played the tune of understanding that not everything can be done at the same time. But he tamely asked for more fans. The truth is that during the two years when he was Prime Minister not one single lira was spent on the refurbishing of old wards or invested in air conditioning. All investment in air conditioning was done by the Nationalist government from 1991 to date. This year is no exception. We have already invested over Lm150,000.

Our record. Despite the average age of the senior citizens at SVPR being 82 and rising, and nearly all are dependent and most are frail, the number of deaths at this flagship of elderly care has edged continuously down from 345 in 2001 to 265 in 2006. This year seems no different. Up to the end of July the number of those who passed away was 149. This is the result of the optimum care we give thanks to our investment, as well as to the geriatricians and other dedicated staff. As the resident population grows older every year I don't think this trend will continue for long. We are not promising immortality but the best care for as long as they are with us.

I have long canvassed for the depoliticising of the health sector. Labour has never taken up the offer. But these accusations are beyond the pale. They should be ashamed that they ever uttered such brutal and vicious untruths that cannot but hurt and alarm the elderly.

Dr Deguara is Minister of Health, the Elderly and Community Care.