Family and Social Solidarity Minister Michael Farrugia is an odd specimen. Though there are lawyers, doctors, educators and business people who abuse the State and fellow citizens, such abuses figure rarely in the speeches of justice, health, education and finance ministers. They tend to focus on the challenges and problems their categories face. Farrugia is different.

Most of the time he laments how many of those who are on welfare are actually bums and that his ministry has made the curbing of abuse its highest mission. Those who genuinely depend on welfare and the fact that: “People falling by the wayside… [may be] led to abuse the system” (Farrugia’s words back in 2006) rarely figure in his speeches.

Regarding concrete initiatives to help people out of poverty, these have been limited to the opening of a boutique, to having senior citizens painting walls, to reading stories to young people, and to the ad nauseam repetition of the mantra that the only way out of poverty is through work and education. Anything in order to avoid the dreaded ‘R’ word.

Ideally, everyone should have a high degree of education. Including as manypeople as possible in the working community is also laudable. Yet, these alone will not solve all issues related to poverty.

To start with, people may be at risk of poverty (whatever this phrase may mean) even if they are employed, given the wages some people are paid and the working conditions many are facing. People on welfare are likely to get such jobs.

Secondly, there are cases where individ-uals cannot conceivably take a job given their particular situation. Thirdly, if by ‘employed’ one understands people doing a productive job, then we have to accept that some people can never engage in a productive job because of psychological and personal reasons.

In some cases I do agree that such people ought to be given a job, without however anyone expecting them to perform the same duties and produce similar outcomes aspeople who do not have such problems. In others, as with many senior citizens who have lost the physical, psychological and existential vigour of their youth, expecting them to keep on working is simply devious.

Fourthly, considering education as the panacea for poverty and social exclusion is dumb and illogical. Simple fact: 20 years ago, the percentage of ‘educated people’ was lower as was the number of people who were poor or facing ‘the risk of poverty’. Simple logic: a society made up of 1,000 individuals where everyone holds a PhD, which however can only offer 600 decent jobs, will be a society that has 400 highly-educated individuals leading miserable existences.

We had to wait for Labour to be elected to office to witness this Goebbels-style vilification of the poorest members of society on State TV

Yet Farrugia keeps repeating the education, work and abuse mantra. This serves a number of purposes. It avoids the dreaded ‘R’ word. It blames those who are suffering for their ills. It also directs the wrath of working people who are feeling the effects of the cost of living, the pressure to take more jobs and a decline in their quality of life against weaker targets.

Regarding the latter, Farrugia seems to have made a proselyte in the Prime Minister himself, given the post-Budget rant on people being angry at those who abuse welfare. Abuse is obviously to be curbed.

Yet, many working and middle-class people, while being angry at those who abuse welfare (understandably, given the frequent outbursts of Farrugia and the branding of people on welfare in the media as bums), are not too happy about overpaid government consultants, top jobs for members of the elite (and their partners) and other perks for the ruling caste either. The Prime Minister though, failed to refer to the latter.

Regarding the marginalisation of society’s weak and poor in mainstream media, this has taken various forms. One involves ignoring poverty or assigning to news concerning poor people the same (or less) media space as other items like stolen teddy bears, missing peacocks and festa paraphernalia.

The PBS newsroom specialises in this field. It recently failed to report a public initiative concerning a sector which faces serious issues of poverty – senior citizens – even though the initiative involved one former Labour prime minister, the daughter of another and 78 other known and less-known individuals. Alternatively, mainstream media minimises poverty and/or trivialises its causes and remedies. Some specialise in victimising further the victims through features and stories that implicitly and effectively imply that the poor are responsible for their own situation.

The lowest point though, was reached in what is arguably the most idiotic discussion programme ever to appear on local airwaves (not a mean feat), Skjetti. One episode recently contained a sketch involving a successful hard-working individual (a mythological figure with whom many locals fantastically identify) who has the money he earned taken from his wallet to fund all types of welfare. Yes, we had to wait for Labour to be elected to office to witness this Goebbels-style vilification of the poorest members of society on State TV. Mintoff and Boffa will be turning in their graves.

In the article I fail to mention the Opposition party, because I don’t want to refer to entities that at the time of writing are non-existent.