Much has been said about the small group of Malta Labour Party ‘elves’ and their prolific contributions of letters to the local media.

But there now appear to be somewhat larger elves giving the MLP’s two cents’ worth in the international sphere, a review of The Economist Intelligence Unit’s September 2007 country report on Malta suggests.

One of the EIU’s analyses of Malta’s political scene, in fact, reads practically verbatim from an MLP press release.

In total, the EIU published three separate articles analysing Malta’s “political scene” – one entitled Election manifestos begin to emerge for the main parties and a second headlined Anti-immigration sentiment grows.

It is the third article, however, that smacks of the messages being propagated – some would say incessantly and beyond their sell-by dates – by the Labour media over recent months.

Entitled Electoral campaigns dominated by corruption investigations, the article reads as though it had been produced straight from the MLP’s media machinery, or from the mouths of the MLP’s spin doctors.

“The PN’s unofficial election campaign has been marred by corruption allegations, many of which are being investigated by the police,” the article opens.

It then goes on to list the opposition’s favourite subjects over recent months – the Malta Maritime Authority sea craft licences scandal, the issuing of invalidity pensions at the social security department and the forging of signatures on education certificates in Gozo.

But what the article highlights and dedicates the lion’s share of its content to are the recent scandals, heavily propagated by the Labour media, at the Malta Transport Authority.

Referring to the prime minister’s refusal to accept the resignation offered up by Roads and Urban Development Minister Jesmond Mugliett, the article notes that Dr Gonzi “passed up a significant opportunity to show the current government’s commitment to fighting corruption and punishing the perpetrators.”

The article goes on to refer to tapes leaked to the Labour-leaning media this summer showing that Competitive-ness and Communications Minister, and former Transport Minister, Censu Galea had known of the abuse.

It notes, in typical opposition fashion: “While the MLP called for Mr Galea’s resignation, the prime minister failed to take action.

“These episodes,” the report adds, “have decreased the credibility of the PN to fight corruption and have increased public perception that corruption is rife at all levels of the public administration in Malta.”

It is curious that the subjects treated in the article, as well as the wider subject of corruption, have been among the mainstays of Labour’s own unofficial electoral campaign.

What is even more curious is that the article only mentions that the PN’s campaign has been marred by corruption allegations, and makes no reference, as a full analysis of a political scene should, to the fact that Labour has made the same subjects the cornerstones of its own unofficial campaign.

Nor does it refer to the significant political mileage the opposition has sought to gain through the allegations and the Prime Minister’s rejection of the ministers’ resignations.

The EIU uses a network of some 500 international contributor economists in developing its analyses of countries, governments, multi-national corporations and financial institutions.

It is not known who contributes to Malta’s country report, or indeed who contributed the specific article on Malta’s political scene as, in line with EIU tradition, contributors’ “by lines” are withheld. It is, however, a known fact that MLP leader Alfred Sant is himself a former contributor.

What is, however, dangerous is that the EIU is perhaps the most respected in its field and thousands of potential investors look to its political and commercial opinions for investment guidance. With Malta in need of foreign direct investment, it would be a pity if any potential investors, whose opinions tend to change at the drop of a hat, were to be swayed by any such political manoeuvring.