Human suffering should be a top priority

The Budget for 2010 was moderate, stated the GWU. Other unions and employers' associations agreed that it was a good Budget. There was only one raised tax, on cigarettes, and considering the international recession and our precarious financial situation as regards the deficit and national debt, then one must excuse and forgive the government for not accommodating claims for more benefits, and for leaving out certain projects in its list of priorities.

All this doesn't mean that one had to agree with the whole Budget or that better decisions could not have been taken regarding certain issues.

Nationalist MP Jean Pierre Farrugia questioned the suitability of the one-off energy allowance for families with children, insisting that €130 for a family of four was not enough (November 16). Finance Minister Tonio Fenech said that: "We could have helped fewer families, and given more to those most in need".

Well, I think that would have been the best policy because surely out of those 97 per cent of families who are to benefit, there are a substantial number who could easily do without the government's compensation; whereas another substantial number of families who cannot make ends meet and are near or below the poverty line, are still going to suffer with only €130 as compensation.

Another debatable issue is the question of the national sexual health policy. A programme should be launched to enlighten the people, especially the young, about sexual diseases and the importance of abstinence or, if sexual contact cannot be avoided, for one to use protection.

Minister John Dalli said that he had no idea why plans changed and emphasised: "Don't ask me. I did what I had to do" (November 11).

Philip Carabot, Genitourinary Clinic consultant, was very disappointed after being made to understand that the policy would be included in the Budget. After waiting for 10 years, he was hoping that something would finally be done.

Now may I dare to suggest what I may have done had I been Finance Minister? Naturally, first I would have had to convince the PM and the Cabinet about my proposal, which is rather simple but radical and very sensible, I might say.

The government will soon start work on several large projects which are going to cost millions of euro. There is the Piano project of City Gate, the roads and other infrastructure, Smart City, etc. On the other hand, it is faced with well-known priorities like the waiting lists, the medicines needed by terminally ill patients, the need to give more support and financial help to the unemployed, the near or below the poverty line families and the poor pensioners.

I would have sacrificed one of the big projects for the time being and instead spent the millions saved to solve - once and for all - the waiting lists, the medicines and other can't-wait-any-longer problems. Humanity cannot be left to suffer for much longer.

One may argue that the projects are going to create jobs and generate a lot of money; also that we cannot wait any longer for these projects to start off. Of course, no one will contradict that. But I believe that human suffering and health problems should be the top priority above all other planned projects.

But then, I'm not a politician, and less so, a minister of finance.