Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1541680
THROUGHOUT Malta's develop- ment, youth have always been the driv- ing force for creativity, ambition, and development. The evidence in favour of a considerably influential generation in the projections and conditions of the future, has never been as palpable as today. Such a claim however needs to be supported by financial commit- ments and policy actions rather than words. Government's youth policy has one guiding principle: Providing opportu- nities that enable participation, and participation that induces empower- ment. The aim here isn't simply that young people in Malta need to thrive in the existing environment but rather take part in shaping their society. This logic was translated in this year's investment in 40 projects that saw the participation of 9,400 youngsters who were given access to civic lessons through the development of essential skills in everyday life. These projects provided real oppor- tunities for development, involving discussion forums, simulations on democracy, leadership workshops, and engaging the wider community through participation and experimen- tation. A particular note of gratitude goes to Aġenzija Żgħażagħ for the in- put provided to develop and imple- ment this policy. It is also in this context that govern- ment had created the Youth Advisory Forum, a national framework through which people between the ages of 16- 35 take part in high-level consultations directly with the prime minister in a format worthy of a parallel Cabinet of ministers. Having said that, challenges remain. Housing affordability is a major con- cern of the younger cohorts, and gov- ernment has taken the issue up in a proactive manner. The first-time buyer and equity sharing schemes alongside the 10% deposit fee are tools that are assisting us in reaching this aim. There are parallel investments in terms of education and student affairs. Education goes beyond the walls of the school, and it has the responsibil- ity of preparing youths for leadership, innovation, and citizenship. The sup- plemental budget related to stipends includes an increase of 15%, amount- ing to €6 million worth of investment, specifically addressed to students. Malta has also asserted its leadership role on the European scene through the organisation of the 4th Europe- an Youth Work Convention, where it hosted 500 delegates from across the world to map the way forward on the future of youth work. In 2026, Malta will also initiate the first joint Youth Wellbeing Research Project, involving over 15 government agencies in the development of an ev- idence-informed national framework that considers the social and person- al needs of young people. This will be launched with a view of youth-proof- ing future government policies. The implicit message here is that young people should not have to wait for their chance. They are already at the decision-making table. As Malta presses forward in its de- velopment, and in light of a growing economy, government finds it imper- ative to invest in areas such as infra- structure and industry, and even more importantly, in its human capital. The development of an economi- cally stable Malta is founded on the well-being and happiness of society, and therefore, it becomes imperative to continue focusing on its youth—its agents of change. THE Social Security Department must be certain that a cash donation was not used by an applicant to be eligible for medical assistance that is means test- ed. This was held in a judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal on 26 Novem- ber 2025 presided by Mr Justice Law- rence Mintoff. The case was Rita Psaila vs Director General (Social Security). The director general (the defendant) had filed an appeal from a decision delivered by the Arbiter for Social Ser- vices. The case concerned a decision taken by the director general in August 2024 to reject an application by Rita Psaila for medical assistance. The di- rector general argued that Psaila had over €14,000 in capital and therefore did not qualify for assistance. From in- vestigations it resulted that Psaila sold an undivided share of property in Ra- bat for €140,000. On the same day of the sale, she donated her share to her daughter. At the time she did not re- ceive medical assistance and she was employed. Psaila went to the Arbiter for Social Services and contested the director general's decision to reject her medical assistance application. The Court of Appeal reproduced the arbiter's decision, which pointed out that at the time when Psaila applied for the assistance, she did not possess €14,000. The sale of the property took place 10 years before her medical as- sistance application. Caselaw dictated that the transfer of assets of an appli- cant must be relevant. The arbiter said the time between the sale of property and the application of social assistance had to be taken in consideration. In this particular case, the sale took place n 2012. The application for social assis- tance was filed 10 years later in 2022. The arbiter argued that the reasoning of the director general would create a barrier to the free movement of capital and the sale of assets. People may de- cide not the sell the property in order to retain their social security benefits, the arbiter argued. The director general appealed from this decision on the grounds that the arbiter did not decide this case accord- ing to the Social Security Act. The law states that an applicant for social as- sistance must produce all certificates, documents and information that can have an impact on the application. According to the director general, Psaila did not inform the department that she had received money following a sale of property. Neither did she in- form the department of how she dis- posed of this money. According to Ar- ticle 20(1)(c) of the Social Security Act for one to be eligible to medical assis- tance, that person must pass a means test. The director general argued that the sale of the property in 2012 should be included in the means test. Psaila argued that once she was giv- en the medical assistance, she did not exceed €14,000 in capital and the sale 10 years prior should not preclude her from receiving the benefit. The Court of Appeal confirmed that from the acts of the case, the sale and the donation did take place in 2012. The court pointed out that Psaila re- ceived €140,000 following the sale of half of an undivided share of property of her son-in-law. She did not explain to the department what happened to this money when she applied for med- ical assistance. From the acts of the case, she sold her only property and went to live with her daughter. The Appeals Court upheld this ground of appeal. It was up to Psaila to inform the di- rector general on what happened to the money. It seems that after the do- nation, she now has less than €14,000 in her name. The judge ruled that the fact that the money was donated, does not mean Psaila did not need to ex- plain how the money was used. The Court of Appeal upheld the di- rector general's appeal and annulled the arbiter's decision. 8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 30 NOVEMBER 2025 OPINION & LAW Donation does not exonerate social security recipient from explaining how money was used Youths as leaders of a future we are building today Keith Azzopardi Tanti Parliamentary Secretary for Youth, Research, and Innovation The aim here isn't simply that young people in Malta need to thrive in the existing environment but rather take part in shaping their society MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates The law states that an applicant for social assistance must produce all certificates, documents and information that can have an impact on the application.