In the middle of a discussion about a controversial issue, a friend broached another delicate subject – adoption. In societies which congratulate themselves on their hard stand against abortion, one would have expected that adoption – when seriously organized – would find good encouragement. That is hardly the case.

So this friend described the huge diffiulties experienced by couples who wish to adopt children: and they’re financial, administrative, medical as well as made up of sheer delays, apart from the risk, that remains quite significant, of getting tricked and much money gets paid with no tangible result.

It is not easy to come up with a solution to such a problem. Difficulties in the way are really enormous. Still the humanitarian benefits to be derived are considerable if matters could be settled correctly, transparently and with reasonable speed.

***

PASSPORTS

Suarez, Barcellona’s well known football star, was close to being transfered to an Italian team. But the latter had already used the quota of non-EU players it could hire. To go on its books, as a Latin American Suarez needed to be given an Italian passport. A problem was that he found it difficult to comply with the necessary procedures in time. To be sure, no dissent was registered about this matter.

What most struck me about the whole business though was the context in which it happened.

Business it was, related to sport true, but still the granting of an Italian passport to Suarez was going to happen as part of a market transaction.

One could not but wonder then at what has been repeated so often about the sanctity of passports issued by EU member states, all this in relation to the investor citizenship programmes run by Malta... along with others... The tune has been that it is incorrect to put citzenship up “for sale” as this undermines the integrity of the EU and that... plus anyway, so many other reasons that have been put forward...

Now, again, it is true that as a process, the Suarez business is different from the investment for citizenship programmes. But still, as part of a trading package, why does nobody find it objectionable? Where is the coherence?    

***

POLITICAL HYPOCRISY

Political hypocrisy is well rooted everywhere. In the US, it can even be flaunted on a continental scale with nothing to worry about.

With the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the greatly mourned Supreme Court justice, the process was triggered for the nomination by the US President of her successor. But in a few weeks’ time, Donald Trump will be facing a re-election contest to determine who will be President for the coming four years.

Many months before then President Obama’s term of office expired, a similar case occurred. With one voice, exponents of the Republican Party declared that Obama had to refrain from making a nomination, so that when the presidential election was over, the incoming President would present the nomination. Republicans did their best (or worst) to kill the nomination Obama put before the Senate.

Now, many Republicans see no problem if Trump proceeds with his nomination. They’re all set to approve it. It is difficult to understand how such positions can avoid creating a total distrust in political leadership.