The country has now heard the Budget Speech and the multiple reactions to that, on the political and on the constituted bodies levels, followed this week by the speeches by the political leaders in the House.

Mostly, one would say the government's economic programme has been positively welcomed, although one still has to receive and consider the reactions by the European Commission and the other Member States.

The figures are there, for all to see: the deficit that has been shaved, the growth that has been attained, the number of unemployed persons which has been brought down, and the number of people working, the number of tourists who have come.

Each side tugs at these and similar statistics like wind to its sails. Beyond the controversies, it is undeniable that both sides have contributed to these attainments and any attempt to hog the attainments is pitiable and not objective.

This paper said last week that the 2016 programme, or Budget, is short term and not strategic enough. There has not been any sustainable and reasoned objection to this point of view. Nevertheless, the government has unobtrusively tried to inject an element of strategic thinking into the programme.

Maybe it was unavoidable: the government, like any government, has to straddle between different claims and demands from the different sectors that make up the country.

Thus, for instance, there is the need to tackle the situation, the demands of the persons at risk of poverty. The government's response to this is to stimulate these persons to stop hanging from the government's social security system and to get a job. Concurrently, huge efforts were taken in past months to remove people from the Long-Term Unemployed lists and get them to undergo training/get a job and these efforts seem to have been successful.

Not enough has been said, structurally, about help to the SME sector and start-ups. Although this has been commented upon by some of the constituted bodies, this has been a rather muted comment, if at all. Efforts have been made in the past, such as the help obtained through BOV and the EU (the Jeremie fund) and this has spawned some sort of follow-up by other institutions but one still hopes more and better help can be available, given that to date, no Venture Fund has been set up.

Nor can one remember hearing in the Budget Speech about a consistent government effort to tackle what is underlined in one survey after another as the biggest headaches for business people - tackling the increasing spread of government bureaucracy. In previous years, this issue had been at least mentioned and an MP has been tasked with the unenviable issue but this year not even that made an appearance.

What does the private sector require from government? Basically, that government exerts as little pressure on business as possible, facilitates business and removes snarl-ups and bottlenecks with the minimum of fuss.

The private sector also demands a level playing field for all players in the sector and the removal of any real or supposed unfairness and favouritism.

For all the changes that a change of government brings with it, there have been changes at agencies such as Malta Enterprise and the like but honestly if the situation was not all that rose pre-2013, it has not changed much since then.

The manufacturing sector in Malta has been, for many years, the Cindirella of our economic sectors, so much that a minister in the preceding government carved a niche in the history of our country by stating that manufacturing and industry were on their way out. Add to this the reluctance or inability of many in the sectors to upgrade, to expand and to venture into exports.

We should not blame successive governments for this. They have come up with a series of initiatives, including trade delegations etc, but it's no use taking a horse to the water ...