Living on a small piece of territory one calls both home and nation has its advantages, but it can also be nightmarish. I remember one particularly striking cartoon by my late friend and media colleague Maurice Tanti Burlò a decade or so ago showing the whole of a high-rise Malta completely built up, with car exhaust fumes filling the airliner-dotted skies over it, and human figures desperately squeezing themselves out of windows and doors. There were obvious hints of places like Hong Kong, Tokyo and Singapore where over-population, traffic chaos and extreme development have had their negative impact.
The message was, of course: is this the future facing our children and grandchildren? There is really nothing one can do with being so territorially restricted other than making sure the process is kept as slow as possible by resorting to sensible solutions, such as demolishing the old and the worthless and replacing them with the new. That may sound practical enough, but the truth is that in the case of Malta and Gozo, the "old and worthless" soon disappear. What's next then?
It is the dilemma of every small, over-populated land anywhere. Where do you begin and where do you stop? It is alright to wax lyrical about conservation and sustainable development in places where losing a physical gem such as was the Azure Window in Gozo (the sister island will lose a lot more than that with the tunnel project) is actually an everyday occurrence and not a national tragedy. But when it comes to tiny territories the practical side of human living - for it not to be a mere existence - such as providing jobs, food, homes, better communications, infrastructure, and an ever-improving lifestyle, becomes a nightmare. We used to think, even joke about it. Now it is more or less staring us in the face.
It would be ideal if we were able to freeze the whole process of urban living in a small place, but where does one begin? We urgently need to safeguard what's left of our countryside, but how can that be achieved when the demand for more buildings, schools, factories, sports and entertainment venues, and social housing, is growing faster in synch with a dynamic economy? High-rise buildings are the obvious first option, but how high and where? A balance needs to be found, and it is and will continue to be a tall order for any future government.
Whatever happened to poetry, one might be tempted to retort? The poetic vision most of us have is that of a frozen time warp. Keep everything as it is today, or possibly, as it was. Wouldn't it be lovely to see a reduction in the number of cars, people not wanting their own home, no new factories, no new commercial initiatives, no new buildings, everything frozen physically and in time?
The same applies to the idea of families, politics and the general lifestyle. Let the foreigners from the poorer countries have the babies while our sperm also stays frozen. Commuting is healthier if you do it on foot or riding a bicycle, and as for holiday travel abroad. Wouldn't it be better if we switched back to the time when only the village doctor and parish priest could afford it?
We can also have frozen values, such as being happy with just a coffee early in the morning, segregated congregations, dole queues, and ħobż biż-żejt, for if life on earth is tough, there is always the next one somewhere else, no?
There are also frozen attitudes, such as doing politics the old way. Promise heaven and earth, then do your thing. And why should minorities, the disadvantaged and the sick have their rights when we can freeze and keep the previous methods of ridiculing them, hiding them and denying them what was accorded to the "normal" majority? Why give women the opportunity to work, to raise children single-handedly and to enjoy equal rights and conditions, when it's nicer having them at home to look after six or seven children in between keeping bed and slippers warm for the husband?
Freeze all that, if you can! The reality is there simply is no going back. If huge countries such as Australia, China and the US are feeling the pressure from an overgrown society and its insatiable demands, the challenge to the territorial minnows of this weary world can become gradually overwhelming. With lobbies and NGOs rightly offering stoic resistance to overnight exaggerations, and reasonable governments and politicians keeping their feet steadfast on the brakes, the ultimate ugly scenario can be delayed by centuries.
Nothing stays frozen, however. Even the arctic poles are melting fast. Humankind still has to look ahead. The same goes for this nation, caught as it is between seeking to salvage and to rehabilitate what is historically and culturally precious, and satisfying the demand for the new, the healthy, and the exciting. Striking that balance has to be the new target.
***
Sad revelations
While our own government goes on with plans to gradually provide, by 2019, ALL life-saving cancer medicines free of charge to its citizens, elsewhere in the world things continue to take an ominous turn. It was revealed last week how one of the world's top drug companies was considering the destruction of its stockpiles in the hope of creating artificial shortages and making bigger profits from the inevitable price hikes. It is certainly not a new business concept.
This sad revelation by the London Times concerned the South African Aspen Pharmacare company which has been accused of actually considering this atrocious plan - pushing a price increase amounting to 4,000 per cent for its products - during a row with the Spanish health authorities a couple of years ago. Documents cited by the newspaper showed Aspen's aggressive attitude in its dealing with the Spanish authorities by stopping direct supplies of five cancer drugs, forcing patients to buy other foreign products at much higher prices.
Even sadder, it was learnt that the Spanish episode was not an isolated case for Aspen. It has also actively tried to impose higher prices for its products in the rest of Europe. A year earlier, it was engaged in a no less bitter row with Italy, at one time threatening to stop supplying the medicines if the Italian authorities did not accept a price hike of up to 2,100 per cent within three months. There were even reports of the company orchestrating artificial shortages during the dispute with Italy to exert greater pressure. Other European countries, including Germany, Greece and Belgium, have also, in the recent past, faced similar shortages of the same Aspen products.
According to the Times, the inflated price drive began after Aspen bought the marketing rights to the so-called "Cosmos" portfolio of oncology medicines from the British pharma giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in 2009 as part of a €323 million deal.
In this case, perhaps being small helps in that a seriously committed government as we have at this moment in time, as well as a burgeoning economy, plus a genuine desire to let the State do the work which private sources cannot ever match, can assure a free supply of all cancer-fighting drugs. It is what a true welfare state is all about.
***
Just the panel
As an old friend remarked the other day that judging by the panel that is to participate in a conference on "Soċjetà Ġusta għal Żminijietna" (A Just Society for Our Times) to be held on 13 May by the Malta Catholic Action's social assistance secretariat, it sounds more like a PN activity than a socio-religious one. Check the list of speakers. Expect more of this.