MOTHER Teresa, born Anjeze Gonxhe Bojaxhiu in 1910, was, one day short of her 19th death anniversary, made a saint by the Catholic Church.Sunday’s canonisation, witnessed by many at the Vatican and around the world, not only marked the highest order in the catholic pantheon, but brings to the fore once again the life’s work of Mother Teresa. Besides knowing the confirmation of sainthood is that of earthly man, it requires a process, including evidence of miracles performed by the person — two of which were cited in her case — Mother Teresa’s life’s work, which informed her canonisation, will play a major role in the Church; which, in addition to being the largest Christian denomination, is among the most influential non-governmental forces in the world.

Mother Teresa (1910-1997) has made her name living and working among the poor, and has earned the moniker “saint of the gutter.” When she moved to Kolkata (formerly Calcutta), India based on what she said was God’s calling, she not only brought the international spotlight to poverty, but forced ways and means to help the less fortunate among us.

Poverty is a social disease; and like any disease, if the right environment is not created to contain or destroy it, it spreads. And where it spreads and ‘contaminates’ others, society is less served by it. If looked at through the lens of crime, poverty not only creates the environment for the less fortunate to take from those perceived better off, but also such persons may be denied needed social services, having been considered by government and society as undeserving.

Lest it be misconstrued, crime is not only a function of the poor, given that in its truest sense it speaks to the breaking of the law.
Where a society fails to put measures in place to work to reduce and eliminate poverty, the entire society suffers. It does no society any good for the well-off and connected to think that, once their needs are met, nothing else matters. Poverty brings with it squalor, poor quality of life, reduced life expectancy, and so forth. Most importantly, poverty robs the nation of the full utilisation of its most valued resource, i.e. its human capital.
A society that is progressive and whose government cares about its citizen will factor in the alleviation of poverty as an important pillar in development. Systems will be put in place to zero in on data that present evidence of poor demographics and communities, with the intent of directing needed resources. In some societies, more notably the developed, there are large-scale social programmes managed by government and non-governmental organisations. For instance, the poor will benefit from feeding, maternal care, housing/shelter, transportation, job training programmes, to name some.

Though ours is a society not so advanced, the roles government and non-governmental organisations play through various programmes help in no small measure those who can access and benefit from same. One recent programme was the School Feeding Programme in the hinterland communities. However, this does not mean that such should not be extended and revisited ever so often, given that as society evolves, so, too, do the people’s needs.

It also should not be forgotten that even among the employed are the poor, and this demographic cannot be ignored. This group is, in many instances, not much better off than the unemployed. And whereas it may be welcome news to hear Junior Minister of Finance, Jaipaul Sharma, announce in June that Guyana has been upgraded to an “Upper Middle Income” economy, the less fortunate among us are still deserving of national attention via policies and programmes that will alleviate their circumstances.
Professor Clive Thomas’s Stabroek News features in 2014 on Inequality and Poverty remain an incisive source for looking at these social problems through objective lenses, and guiding the conceptualisation of policies and programmes. Thomas presents the nation a sobering reminder that “While the headcount measure of poverty is perhaps the most commonly known indicator rate of poverty, it embodies a very important anomaly. Thus, for example, the headcount rate could remain the same (let’s say 30 per cent) for two different years, but the extent or depth of poverty in households or for individuals could differ quite significantly.

“At the same percentage of the poor, one situation could represent greater poverty for those who are below the poverty line than in the other” (September 14, 2014).