One effect of the ongoing economic crisis has been a greater focus on economic matters in political discourse.

True, in a wider sense, the economy has always been a popular topic. But simplistic talk about how people will end up with more money in their pocket is now being increasingly accompanied by somewhat weightier issues such as financial sustainability and just how to make economic growth happen.

But politicised arguments tend to involve widely contrasting claims, and the economy is no exception. Depending on the source, the Maltese economy is either firmly on solid ground or heading towards disaster, a situation which will inevitably be reversed if the next election leads to a change in government.

That the two main parties disagree on economic matters is expected, even beneficial. But many of the arguments made tend to be overly simplistic, a tendency which is not exactly helpful.

One ongoing example has been comparisons between the Maltese economy and the Cypriot one made by both major parties.

Labour was first, citing Cyprus as an example to follow when its economy was booming. Then a crisis struck, and the PN took to gloating over how the Maltese economy would have suffered if Labour’s advice was taken on board.

Comparing economies is a difficult exercise because the situation varies in each country, making Labour’s argument somewhat problematic. The party certainly overlooked issues such as a bloated civil service when it sang the country’s praises.

But the PN’s retort ignored the elephant in the room: That just over a year ago, an explosion severely damaged Cyprus’ largest power station.

A similar incident at Delimara would inevitably have sent Malta’s economy on a downward spiral, with regular blackouts affecting the operations and reputation of its tourism and financial services industry. Public finances would also have been burdened by the expense required to get the plant running again as soon as possible.

Of course, there’s a lot to be said about the decision to store confiscated explosives next to one of the country’s power stations for years on end, but that has nothing to do with the validity of an economic policy.

Other examples abound. Malta’s dependence on what happens overseas tends to be either strongly emphasised or somewhat overlooked, depending on the source and whether a development is positive or not.

That an ongoing crisis is cited to explain why economic targets haven’t been met is unsurprising: But it will be some time before a government cautions that issues outside our borders and outside its control helped bring about an economic boom.

The main parties do not lack people who are well-versed in economic matters, and on occasions – such as events geared towards a more knowledgeable audience – politicians on both sides have shown that they are able to let go of certain populist arguments and discuss issues more seriously.

There is no doubt that many economic matters are far from easy to explain to the public at large, and one cannot expect the bulk of the electorate to have a thorough understanding of the subject any time soon.

But facile arguments which lean towards misrepresenting the situation will only do a disservice. The economy is a serious matter affecting everyone – not just those who understand its complexities – and deserves to be treated seriously.