In a country where bureaucracy proliferates so liberally, a plan by the government to streamline the organisation and running of a string of social services is timely.
If it is well taken up and implemented after full consultation and agreement with all the stakeholders involved, reorganisation could translate into enhanced benefits to the community. For this reason, the move ought to receive the widest possible support by all those who are charged with the provision of the services which, up to now, are available under the specialised agencies set up for the purpose.
Very few details have been made known so far, but it looks as if the government is planning to incorporate two agencies, Appoġġ and Sedqa, into one agency which will eventually replace the Foundation for Social Welfare Services.
The other agency, Sapport, which also falls within the responsibility of the foundation, will become an autonomous body. It will fall under the remit of the parliamentary secretary for rights of people with disability.
It is only natural that some of the people working in these agencies will have particular concerns, but these can be thrashed out through proper consultation before the actual reorganisation takes place. Proper consultation will ensure a smoother transition as those involved will be more readily prepared to cooperate in the development of the new social services network.
People working in this sector are invariably prepared to go to great lengths to help those whose lives are passing through difficult periods, either through their own fault or through the fault of others – society, their partners or, even, their parents.
The plan, as it is being proposed, apparently involves the setting up of no fewer than 18 community centres, equipped with a multi-disciplinary team of social workers, psychologists and other professionals. The move has been welcomed because, as it has been rightly argued, prevention work community level could help target problems at an early stage.
One concern is that there are not enough professional people to cope with the workload. Only about 20 students graduate as social workers annually. Maybe more can be done to help encourage students take up studies in this work.
When it is set up, the new organisation could also give a helping hand by promoting its work in schools. In doing this, they will be killing two birds with one stone, for they could at the time educate students in the dangers of addictions, and, also, encourage them to consider taking social care as a career path.
Another legitimate concern is that people battling addition may find it difficult to seek help in centres in their own community. Those charged with the running of the centres will therefore be expected to be flexible enough to see how they can solve the problems of these people as well, possibly by channeling them to other centres.
According to the information made known so far, the new agency will be based on three pillars: family, children and the community. Addictions will apparently fall under the family services programme, and poverty and social exclusion under community services. Maybe the new organisation would also be able to work out a programme specifically tailor-made to tackle addiction problems at work.
There is much work to do in this field. The best way to go about the reorganisation is by ensuring peace of mind and serenity for the carers. The words of assurance given by the family minister indicate that he has this matter very much in mind. The reorganisation can make the social services more effective.