There seems to be a bit of every kind of meat floating in the public pot. Good news, bad news, heartening forecasts, dismal expectations. Rather than half a dozen of one and six of the other the news is presented according to the point of view of the medium carrying it.

On Sunday the Prime Minister gave his usual weekend sermon, a practice he and the Leader of the Opposition share zealously. This time it took the form of an interview by an independent journalist. The head of news at RTK poised careful, not-loaded questions. The PM replied by quickly shifting into high political gear, linking his every bit of the replies to an attack on the opposition. Amidst all the political cuts, thrusts and jibes there was an attempt at economic analysis.

Distillation indicates that the Prime Minister was trying to be careful. On the one hand he played the usual tune intentioned to lift spirits. He said tax measures to attract married women into employment had done the trick. Over 3,000 had joined the labour force. Similarly with measures to entice those who get to the retiring age to remain gainfully occupied and still get their retirement pension: 8,000 had taken advantage of the scheme. Several hundred former dockyard employees had found alternative jobs and around 3,500 graduates had been absorbed into the economy.

Rounding figures rather generously the PM said the economy had created some 20,000 jobs - he did not specify the exact period but the figure, even if inflated, bears analysis. No doubt some opposition spokesperson will try to deflate it.

That is not my point, which requires some more coverage of what the PM said. He indulged in self-praise, claiming that all that seemed good was due to the way the government was acting, but he also stressed that the economy was not as yet back to health.

The pro-government media immediately painted the usual colourful picture, with a bright pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. The anti-administration media resorted to the usual gnashing of teeth over the bad and worse situation admitted by the Nationalist leader.

Which is which? The reality, of course, is that it is a bit of everything, but to date there are more minuses than pluses in play. Hoteliers will be lucky to record break-even for the year ending this month. An employers' spokesman, predicting job losses because of the forthcoming COLA increase of over €6 per week, pointed out that various employers were still on a four-day week.

The government attributes the ballooning deficit to efforts to keep workers in employment. Yet it admits to having spent €8 million in all to save around 2,600 jobs. Praiseworthy in the short term (the long-term outlook remains to be seen), but it does not explain more than a fraction of the runaway budget deficit.

Worse of all, the Prime Minister, according to the current favourite style of flying kites before decisions strike home, signalled that water and electricity tariffs would be going up. Consumers will yell in anguish. Employers will say that's all they need on top of the COLA factor.

The PM gravely observed that when tariffs were cut in May crude oil hovered around US$40 a barrel. It's now looking at $75. He said nothing, though, of what's become of Enemalta's price hedging mechanism. It has been obvious for months that, once the global recession ended and growth resumed, oil prices would rise again. Was the hedging mechanism used to average out the cost of future requirements, or was it not?

There so many conflicting signals it becomes dizzying. Even the claim that Malta's stimulus package totalled 1.6 per cent of GDP has not been properly detailed.

There are economic problems whipped in from the rest of the world. The way they are explained in Malta is not the best formula to cushion uncertainty with clarity as a basis for counter-action. There are problems which Malta cannot influence. If the markets supplied by our exports as well as those from which our tourists are sourced remain weak, we then have to be more imaginative and aggressive in how to target them.

To do so the business community has to plan ahead. Some are able to do it, like Brand International. Others may not have the same skills and resources. As the pilot of the economy the government has to be much clearer with its signals. It is not enough to say it wants to stimulate employment.

It has to show it will encourage real investment, without which employment will not grow. That will be the factor to look at in the Budget to be presented on November 9. That is the beef that must go into the pot.