A few days before the general election, Edward Scicluna laid out, in an interview with this newspaper’s business section, what he envisioned would be the right plan for Malta to generate a faster rhythm of economic growth under a Labour government. He anchored his thinking on the need to expand the potential for growth and outlined his beliefs in a manner that was clear and direct.

His formula was not drastically different in its basic structure to that which his predecessor usually presented in his Government’s pre-Budget document, except perhaps that the Government exercise was usually more technical in nature. This usually put off potential readers, who would normally prefer learning of the Government’s plans in a language that they can easily understand.

It is difficult to find fault in the points made by Prof. Scicluna.

Yes, Malta needs to step up its economic growth to strengthen the Government’s finances, bring down the national debt and, generally, improve living standards. This especially after yesterday’s announcement by the Prime Minister that Malta will end the year with a deficit of between three and 3.5 per cent of GDP.

The problem is how to do it, for, while it is relatively easy to draw up programmes and lay out visions, putting ideas and plans into practice is a different kettle of fish.

Interestingly, Prof. Scicluna is placing a great deal of emphasis on the need to expand the growth potential, arguing, for instance, that “horse power is falling” and that “we need to grow by at least four per cent”.

He said: “We are saying let’s increase the potential by increasing the labour force, that’s where the labour force participation rate comes in, and investment, which has been falling to a miserable 14 per cent of GDP when it was previously 25 per cent.”

Again, all this makes sense. But, to be fair to the previous Administration, these aims were never off its radar screen either. Greater efforts were made in recent years to increase labour force participation, including that of women, and the results were not bad.

If Labour can improve upon what has been achieved already, so much the better. However, given the unfavourable economic conditions abroad, particularly in other Mediterranean countries, it is unlikely that headway would be made at the speed which Labour might have thought was possible from the Opposition benches.

Now that Labour is in the saddle, it may find that bringing about the kind of efficiency it is envisaging is more difficult than it thinks, particularly in places where trade unions have clout and where workers’ mentality is still anchored in outdated practices based on rigidities that work against any concept of basic efficiency.

Such practices are still widely prevalent in places run or controlled by the Government, such as hospitals and the energy corporation.

It is therefore going to take the new team more than mere coaxing to cut unnecessary bureaucracy and raise efficiency to higher levels. And even if efficiency rises dramatically, it does not necessary follow that new direct foreign investment will start flowing in at a level that would make an immediate dramatic impact on local living standards.

There are factors, besides those mentioned by Prof. Scicluna, that determine the flow of foreign investment, such as, for example, the economic climate. The new Finance Minister may rest assured that he does not have an easy ride in the job.