Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1542674
MALTA prides itself on being an affluent, growing country. Year after year, the govern- ment announces record-break- ing budgets, rising GDP figures and an expanding welfare state. Yet, throughout the year, peo- ple watch on their television screens fundraising events in which individuals lay bare the most painful chapters of their lives to secure help. This con- tradiction should trouble us. Telethons such as L-Istrina, Puttinu Cares, Dar tal-Provi- denza, Caritas Malta, Missio Malta and Dar Bjorn, are deep- ly embedded in our national calendar. They mobilise gener- osity on a scale of €15 million to €20 million every year. Ex- penses to run these telethons might shave off some 15% to 20% from the final amount but this is an issue for another time, Of course, these monies go to fund work that is undeniably essential. The compassion they inspire is mostly genuine, and much of the money raised is in most cases responsibly used. None of this is in question. The problem lies elsewhere. These events have institu- tionalised a charity model that relies on exposure, emotional leverage and the public recy- cling of personal trauma. In doing so, they normalise the idea that access to care, sup- port and inclusion depends on visibility and public sympathy. In a country that describes it- self as economically affluent, this should set off alarm bells. When people are expected to perform their suffering, what we end up witnessing is not solidarity but evidence of sys- temic failure. Televised suffer- ing is not social policy; it is a workaround that quietly shifts responsibility away from the state and places the emotional burden on those least able to carry it. Dignity becomes col- lateral damage. This reality is particularly jar- ring when one considers the scale of public spending. Mal- ta allocates around €2.6 billion annually to social services and benefits, excluding the sig- nificant investment in health, education, housing, inclusion and local government, which all contribute directly to social policy. Why must people still go on television, collect money from the streets or front public campaigns to access essential support? You cannot celebrate eco- nomic success with one hand and broadcast human distress with the other. That contradic- tion is not accidental. It reflects a system that tolerates charity stepping in where rights-based provision should exist. Charity was never meant to replace the state or function as a parallel welfare system funded through spectacle and guilt. Those with lived experienc- es of hardship are rendered vulnerable once again, used as backdrops to narratives of gen- erosity rather than being genu- inely empowered. Importantly, non-govern- mental organisations them- selves are not the villains of this story. Many are trapped in an outdated funding eco- system where survival depends on outdated telethons. When exposure becomes the only viable route to sustainability, the problem is structural, not organisational. NGOs deserve funding systems that do not force them to compromise the dignity of the people they serve. The current model also cre- ates fertile ground for reputa- tional laundering and political opportunism. I was shocked to see people parading those mas- sive, silly, big, presumptuous cheques knowing well-enough how some of the companies treat their staff members while piggy-backing on peoples' trag- edies. This is why Malta ur- gently needs a national reset. A public debate leading to a national convention on fund- raising is needed, involving the Malta Council for the Volun- tary Sector, the Malta Coun- cil for Economic and Social Development, parliament's Social Affairs Committee, the Commissioner for Voluntary Organisations and any oth- er stakeholders. A national conversation involving ben- eficiaries, volunteers, social operators, VOs, NGOs, pro- fessionals, policymakers, aca- demics, media and the wider public is long overdue. For the time being, it seems, parliament through the Social Affairs Committee looks like it is going to take a leading role—a step in the right direc- tion. Avoiding this conversation is no longer neutral; silence simply protects the status quo. Such a debate must con- front the ethical cost of expo- sure-based fundraising and ex- plore dignity-first alternatives. Across Europe, NGOs are increasingly funded through automatic micro-donations, participatory public funds, so- cial impact bonds, CSR foun- dations and transparent digital platforms. These mechanisms generate reliable funding with- out placing individuals under the spotlight or demanding personal disclosure. Malta could adopt similar ap- proaches. Even modest opt-in payroll donations, matched partially by employers, could generate millions annually. Participa- tory budgeting for communi- ty projects, structured charity lotteries, regulated crowdfund- ing for targeted initiatives and cause-related marketing partnerships with business- es all offer viable alternatives. Strengthening social enter- prises and cooperatives under existing legislation could also provide sustainable income streams while creating jobs and social value. At the same time, some prac- tices should be phased out and declared illegal. For example, charity collection boxes that rely on public pity are dehu- manising and belong to anoth- er era. Leadership in social pol- icy and service provision must also be strengthened; the cur- rent vacuum only entrenches reliance on spectacle. If dignity truly matters, Malta's charity models must change. And if social leader- ship exists, now is the moment for it to show itself. 6 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 18 JANUARY 2026 OPINION Andrew Azzopardi Professor of youth, community and migration studies When charity becomes a spectacle: Rethinking Malta's model of solidarity The public donated €5.7 million to the charity telethon (Photo: L-istrina/Facebook) If dignity truly matters, Malta's charity models must change. And if social leadership exists, now is the moment for it to show itself