Financially marginalised citizens

I recently noted an excellent article by Julian Micallef in the periodical Forum fl-Ewropa. He advocates the need to eradicate what I term to be financial exclusion in that citizens of some EU countries are marginalised because of their inaccessibility to possessing a bank account and that this thereby impinges on their intrinsically fundamental right to hold such.

His submissions in this regard are absolutely correct, yet, at the other end of this spectrum I would argue that to possess a bank account is not the general panacea as perceived and that this "must-have" bank account brings with it certain unwarranted injustices and restrictions. For it is my understanding that the basic tenet of Mr Micallef's argument concerns the individual freedom of access and, ultimately, freedom of choice and it is to this latter freedom that I wish to take issue as I maintain that this is in fact not an option in Malta.

As stated, I fully concur that it is a citizen's inalienable right in a free, fair and open society to possess a bank account but that in not taking up this option it should equally ensue that one should not be penalised or have no access to an alternative method of receiving or encashing moneys due. No alternative to receive or obtain any moneys due or owed has long been the order of the day here and if one does not possess a bank account one then encounters all sorts of problems to draw on one's funds.

It is continually cited that progress and security are the key elements being applied to account for this methodology being deployed whereby all moneys owed must be processed through a bank and via a cheque format. Yet, I would argue that this pivotal point is extremely unilateral and does not take into consideration the payee's needs and requirements but merely addresses the issue to the ease of distribution and benefit of the paymaster.

Therefore, I maintain that in this scenario there exists no freedom of choice and that it is more akin to being choiceless as there is no provision for an alternative form of payment to be effected.

Moreover, this results in punitive measures being then applied, accompanied by other unaccommodating restrictive practices such as the absurd insistence of a cheque being cashed before noon (what's that nonsense all about - and what other country would tolerate such detrimental customer service?) as well as long queues at banks caused by insufficient staff etc. In a truly democratic society the views of the minority, and principles contained within, must be tolerated and respected and one should not be constrained, dare I say bullied, into the absolute necessity to possess a bank account but rather have access to that much greater liberator in freedom of choice. An alternative method for receiving moneys due should, indeed must, be readily available. However, it is sad to note that, once again, our tame acceptance of such inconsistencies and injustices are manifestly apparent in our meek resigning to this fate, for we continually fail to fight for our rights in such matters. In the immortal words of Wolfie Smith: power to the people! I live in hope, albeit pure, naked and fragile!