Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Signatures, lack of legitimacy and candidates

Yesterday the Latvian Central Election Bureau announced that 70% (110 000 signatures) of the 149068 signatures needed for initating the popular referendum are allready collected. It seems that the civil society exists in this country and next Wednesday I shall probably need to pop into the barbershop (watch my previous entries:-). Yesterday' s " Kas notiek Latvijā" TV show explicitly showed, that the travails of governing coalition lack credibility due to the simple disregard of the major governance pronciple of the modern liberal democracy - acceptance of the minority existence and involvement of arguments in the parliamentary debate.

We must speak about the inertia of the Soviet totalitarian rule here, when pluralism of opinions did not simply exist. Therefore, any democratic majority in Latvia so far simply considered that their ideas and decisions are omnipresent, and, must be accepted without serious discussion within framework of a parliamentary debate. I can give an example from the Salaspils town council where I am elected as a representative. There are discussions about myriad of issues in standing committees, but as an opposition member of the council I never know how hidden the agenda to be discussed is? Then in the council meeting there is no tradition of the dabate, and, in case there is any opposition against ideas proposed by the maire of the town it is simply squashed by rude demagoguery in a one man show fashion.

Not really demagoguery but incompetency was presented in the Latvian TV evening news by the incumbent Minister of Education, Ms Baiba Rivža. Her performance was simply unacceptable to her stature, and she did not even try to defend herself as a politician. It seems that some Latvian MP's are simply living in a bubble, and still act as if there is some mysterious Godfather later cleaning up the mess of their "missadventures". Her explanantion about the real situation in the education sector, "impossible payrise", and outright rejection of the teachers decision to strike during the end of the school year examination time made me to conclude that either Ms Rivža is incompetent, or she has simply concluded that her government has lost the last bits of legitimacy. Latvian PM, Aigars Kalvītis still tries to position himself as a man in charge, but more and more the Latvian government seems like a little boat that is washed into the stormy sea with the boyish captain at the rudder.

In the meantime one candidate after another has announced that they would not run for the Latvian presidency. Andris Piebalgs, Žanete Ozoliņa, Georgs Andrejevs, and Ivars Lācis announced that they would not agree on running for the presidential post, and yesterday also incumbent Minister of Foreign Affairs Artis Pabriks announced that he would not run for the president under the present terms.

It seems that the regrouping of the governing elite in Latvia takes place in earnest. Peoples Party (TP) chooses their candidate for the president between Māris Ruiekstiņš and Aigars Štokenbergs this weekend. According to overwhelming opinion of the opposition parties both candidates are not up to the merit of being able to consolidate warring faction in the Latvian Saeima. Shall see who is going to be able to perform this task in this interregnum in Latvia? In any case, if signatures are collected, then according to Latvian Constitution referendum should take place no earlier than one month after the closing date of the signatures collection (May 3), and no later than two months after that date. The head of the Election Bureau, Artis Cimdars said that the referendum most probably should take place in July 7, 2007. It is a symbolic date, the last day of the Latvian incumbent president Vaira Vīķe Freiberga in the office.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Election campaign limits - test for Latvian democracy

Tēriņu griesti — tests demokrātijai

Partiju finansēšana no valsts budžeta ir pieņemta prakse vai visās Eiropas Savienības valstīs. Vēlēšanu kampaņu ierobežojumus, piemēram, Lielbritānijā ieviesa tālajā 1883. gadā, un Šveicē joprojām aizliedz priekšvēlēšanu reklāmas televīzijā. Latvija ir palikusi viena no retajām dalībvalstīm, kur partijas saņem finansējumu no valsts nevis tieši, bet gan pastarpināti. Proti, jau tagad nodokļu maksātāji apmaksā tautas priekšstāvju telefona sarunas un biroja uzturēšanas izdevumus, kā arī, piemēram, tikšanās ar vēlētājiem. Tomēr atšķirībā no pārējām Eiropas Savienības (ES) valstīm Latvijā politisko partiju uzturēšanas finansējumu nenodrošina valsts, šādi saglabājot uzkrītošu privātu ziedotāju ietekmi Latvijas politikā.

IFES eksperts politisko partiju finansēšanas jautājumos Marčins Valeckis (Marcin Walecki), runājot par politisko organizāciju finansēšanas modeļiem, uzsver, ka nedz Eiropā, nedz arī pasaulē nepastāv vienots un ideāls partiju finansēšanas un kontroles modelis, jo šāda modeļa izstrāde ir katras suverēnas valsts pilsoniskās sabiedrības un valsts administrācijas savstarpējās mijiedarbības rezultāts.[1] Korupcijas novēršanas un apkarošanas biroja (KNAB) un Sabiedriskās politikas centra Providus organizētajā diskusijā 2007.gada 17.aprīlī lielāko partiju pārstāvji izteicās saprotam nepieciešamību risināt gan tuvākās nākotnes partiju finansēšanas jautājumus, gan arī šobrīd dienaskārtībā esošo priekšvēlēšanu kampaņu finansēšanas problēmu.
Saeimas Valsts pārvaldes un pašvaldību komisijas vadītājs Māris Krastiņš (Tautas Partija) gan centās diskusijas dalībniekus pārliecināt par vēlēšanu kampaņas ierobežojumu atcelšanas pamatojumu, tomēr šāds uzstādījums izrādījās nepārliecinošs. Partiju pārstāvji uzmanīgi pozicionējas sakarā ar šobrīd izveidojušos politisko starpvaldības periodu Latvijā.[2] Lembergiāde ir pamatīgi satricinājusi Latvijas sabiedrību, tāpēc vairums partiju pārstāvji diskusijā uzstāja, ka priekšvēlēšanu kampaņas ierobežojumi ir nepieciešami. Tiesībsarga Romāna Apsīša būtiskākie iebildumi Saeimas deputātu Māra Kučinska (TP), Augusta Brigmaņa (ZZS), Dzintara Jaundžeikara (LPP/LC), Jāņa Lagzdiņa (TP), Andra Bērziņa (LPP/LC) un Ingmāra Līdakas (ZZS) ierosinātajiem „Grozījumos Politisko organizāciju finansēšanas likumā”[3] bija par to, ka paredzētie grozījumi „vājinātu parlamentāro sistēmu un Latvijas konstitucionālo iekārtu kopumā” un ka tie neatbilst arī Satversmes 1., 6. un 101. pantam.”[4]

Vispirms — sākumdeklarāciju

Partijas var finansēt no valsts budžeta, bet pirms tam ir jābūt skaidrībai par publiskajām finansēm. Saeimas Juridiskās nodaļas vadītājs Gunārs Kusiņš ļoti trāpīgi ir atzīmējis[5], ka, lai Latvijas partiju finansēšanas sistēma būtu caurskatāma, beidzot ir nepieciešama mantiskā stāvokļa un nodokļu sākumdeklarācijas pieņemšana.[6] Jebkurš vēlēšanu kampaņu vai partiju finansēšanas likums būs nepilnīgs savā būtībā, ja Valsts ieņēmuma dienestam (VID) nebūs skaidrības, kas tad valsts iedzīvotājiem īsti pieder. Tikai pēc mantiskā īpašuma un nodokļu sākumdeklarācijas pieņemšanas VID un citām tiesībsargājošām iestādēm būs iespējams efektīvi rast pārskatu par finansējuma avotiem. Tas nozīmē, ka Tautas Partijas virzītie „Grozījumi Politisko organizāciju finansēšanas likumā” pirms 2008. gada 1. janvāra[7] radītu pretēju efektu un atsviestu Latvijas sabiedrību politiskā nihilisma muklājā, kāda tā bija pirms 2002. gada.[8]
Tikai pēc nodokļu un mantiskā stāvokļa sākumdeklarācijas ieviešanas būtu pareizi sekot Eiropas valstu praksei un ieviest valsts finansējumu partijām. Šobrīd notiekošā valsts politiskās elites pašattīrīšanās Latvijā nenotiek autonomi, proti, mēs šobrīd redzam Latvijas politisko spēku pārgrupēšanos, kas, savukārt, veicina politiskās kultūras pilnveidošanos pēc Ventspils mēra Aivara Lemberga apcietināšanas. Bez sabiedrības aktīvas līdzdalības un kritiska politisko spēku novērtējuma parakstu kampaņas vākšanas[9] ietvaros nebūtu lietderīgi sākt valsts finansētu partiju politiskās sistēmas maiņu. Proti, Latvijas pilsoņiem šobrīd ir kritiski jānovērtē, vai iepriekšējos gados iedibinātās tradicionālās saimnieka - kalpa saites viņus vairs apmierina. Ja šobrīd notiekošais ir atvēris Latvijas iedzīvotājiem acis, tad būtu loģiski, ka Latvijas iedzīvotāji pārdomātu, kādu ekonomisko kārtu tie pārstāv. Pēc kritiska pašnovērtējuma līdzīgu politisko ideoloģiju pārstāvošas partijas varētu vienoties par postpadomju lappuses pāršķiršanu Latvijas attīstībā un varētu vienoties spēles noteikumu ievērošanā, kas beidzot nozīmētu patiesas tiesiskas valsts izveidi.

Stabilizējas, mācoties no kļūdām

Politiskā kultūra mainās lēni, un pasaules vēsture mums atgādina, ka valstis netiek uzceltas vienā dienā. Tomēr globalizācijas izaicinājumi un kaimiņu Igaunijas piemērs parāda, ka politisko kultūru var mainīt, izveidojot vienkāršu un caurskatāmu valsts un nodokļu administrēšanas sistēmu. Šodienas Latvijā notiekošo varam novērot arī citās Centrāleiropas valstīs. Skatoties pāri robežām, mēs redzam mazākuma valdības krīzi Lietuvā, korupcijas skandālus Polijā, ielu nemierus Budapeštā un konstitucionālu krīzi Rumānijā. Visus iepriekšminētos notikumus vieno pretrunas, kuras ir radušās no satricinājumiem, kurus izraisīja Padomju bloka labklājības valstu sabrukums un ES integrācijas iespaidotās tradicionālo sabiedrības normu pārmaiņas.
Pēc PSRS sabrukuma pie varas nonākušās elites spēja vienoties dalībai ES. Pēc iestāšanās Rietumu „kluba organizācijās” ir visnotaļ dabiski, ka iepriekš notušētās pretrunas politisko spēku starpā laužas uz āru. Latvijas politiskā sistēma stabilizējas, mācoties no savām kļūdām, vai nu tā būtu Bankas Baltija krīze, Jūrmalgeita vai Lembergiāde. Iepriekšminētos politiskos skandālus vajadzētu uztvert pozitīvi, jo tie parāda Imanuela Kanta izteikto patiesību par to, „ka no tik līka koka kā cilvēce nav iespējams uztaisīt taisnu dēli.” Ētika un morāles normas ir subjektīvas, un ētika kolektīvā sfērā kļūst par vispārpieņemtu, tikai politiskajai kultūrai pakāpeniski pilnveidojoties. Demokrātiskā sabiedrībā šī pilnveidošanās nav iespējama bez pilsoņu līdzdalības, jo tā ir demokrātiskas iekārtas pamatu pamats.
Neskatoties uz iespējamajiem parakstu vākšanas rezultātiem, šodienas Saeima ir strādājusi neticami produktīvi tieši pēc Valsts prezidentes 10. marta paziņojuma[10]. Tas, vai šī produktivitāte saglabāsies arī pēc prezidenta vēlēšanām, nav zināms. Šodienas ekonomisko situāciju papildus banku izsniegtajiem kredītiem sakaitē arī nelegālie līdzekļi, kuri pirms 2008. gada 1. janvāra tiek legalizēti. Tas, ka Latvijas politiskā sistēma nostabilizējas un politisko organizāciju likumdošana tiek pilnveidota, ir pozitīvi. Tāpēc, cerot, ka Latvijas lielāko iedzīvotāju daļu nav pārņēmis kolektīvais Stokholmas sindroms, paredzēto likumdošanas izmaiņu kontekstā būs novērojams Latvijas pilsoniskās sabiedrības brieduma līmenis.
____________________________
[1] “Politisko partiju un priekšvēlēšanu kampaņu finansēšanas modeļi: risinājumi un diskutējamie jautājumi”, prezentācija KNAB un Providus diskusijā 2007.gada 17.aprīlī
[2] Interregnum - periods starp valdību maiņām
[3] Grozījumi Politisko organizāciju finansēšanas likumā paredz priekšvēlēšanu izdevumu ierobežojumu atcelšanu.
[4] Latvijas Republikas Tiesībsargs, “Par likumprojektu „Grozījumi Politisko organizāciju (partiju) finansēšanas likumā”
[5] KNAB un Providus diskusija par politisko partiju priekšvēlēšanu tēriņu ierobežojumiem 2007.gada 17.aprīlī
[6] Igaunijā privātpersonu obligātais nodokļu deklarēšanas likums veiksmīgi darbojas jau kopš 1991. gada
[7] Ministru prezidents Aigars Kalvītis (TP) ir solījis šajā datumā uzsākt sākumdeklarēšanu, tomēr likums par to vēl nav pieņemts
[8] Pirms 2002.gada partiju priekšvēlēšanu tēriņi vispār netika regulēti
[9] No 3.aprīļa līdz 2. maijam notiek parakstu vākšana tautas nobalsošanas ierosināšanai par Valsts prezidentes Vairas Vīķes-Freibergas apturētajiem likumiem „Grozījumi Nacionālās drošības likumā” un „Grozījumi Valsts drošības iestāžu likumā”.
[10] Valsts prezidente Vaira Vīķe-Freiberga, izmantojot Satversmes 72.panta piešķirtās tiesības, apturēja „Grozījumus Nacionālās drošības likumā” un „Grozījumus Valsts drošības iestāžu likumā”.

Saturday, April 21, 2007

Interregnum in Latvia...continued

This Wednesday there were Latvian politics big shots in the ''Kas notiek Latvijā'' TV LIVE show. Former prime ministers Šķēle (TP) and Repše (JL) were present as well as Bojārs (LSDSP), Naglis (LC), Urbanovičs (SC), and Šlesers (LPP) took part in the show that had to shed some light on the deals between Ventspils Inc. and the Latvian interest clubs also called political parties. Aye, it sounds a bit smug here, and my critics could quite justifiably say that party membership is declining all across the political spectrum in the industrialized world. However, the numbers of Latvian party membership are just horrendously low (TP and ZZS below 3000, LSDSP about 2500 and JL about 1250 and the rest even lower). These static numbers and present corruption scandals make me apprehensive about the ability of the Latvian political elite to manage the balanced development of the society in case there should be some external shock. Latvian economy is dangerously overheated and inflation expectations should be only fuelled by the illegal monies flooded into economy, whilst waiting for the mandatory tax and property reporting law to be introduced on January 1, 2008.

The LIVE TV show did not bring out anything sensational except the promise of the former PM Šķēle that he WOULD NOT run for the Latvian president! Also it was rather funny to see boasting (bluffing?) Šķēle saying that he was helping A.Lembergs to win a better European harbour directive in the European Commission within the co-decision procedure of the EU, by calling the President of the European Parliament (former head of the EPP/ECD Party Group) Hans Gerd Pöttering. It sounded as if H.G. Pöttering is his buddy, and his claim that Tautas Partija (TP) has the biggest number of Latvian conservative members in the European legislature is a blatant lie, because for example MEP Rihards Pīks is the only member, whilst JL has two MEPs - Valdis Dombrovskis and Aldis Kušķis. Thus, LTV correspondent Guntars Rēders could make an interview with the Speaker of the European Parliament and ask whether he is ever met with Mr Šķēle?

Populist and egocentric former head of the LSDSP was over - critical about the Latvian privatisation process of the 1990's. However, he did not even mention his own son Gundars Bojārs, who was the maire of Riga and is also an owner of multiple businesses that were privatized in a rather obscure way. To be honest privatization is not really on agenda in Latvia these days, although the member of the board in the Riga International Airport was fired this week after the insistence of the LPP party member Krišjānis Peters. Latvian Transport Supremo has ambitious plans in the RIX airport. Shall see whether the double-joggling between megalomaniac projects in the transport sector and positioning of the LPP party as the central axis for the Russian electorate shall be successful?

Today fomerly liberal and presently barely breathing Latvijas Ceļš (LC) party called for a change in the election law that would allow also Latvian non-citizens to vote in municipal elections. About three months ago the same line was pronounced by their election partner LPP, and early this week also PCTVL party anounced that they would start collecting signatures for initating the popular vote, that would give non-citizens the right to participate in the local elections. Therefore, my question here is whether LC feels that 150 000 signatures should be collected and snap elections possibly announced? Or maybe, in order to survive their own identity, they must to attract Russian speaking electors in order to have credibility within the negotiation process while uniting with the LPP party early this spring?

Questions are still open and interregnum in Latvia continues. In today's Diena Mr Zaķis (JL) calls for the Latvian electorate to sign-up for the referendum about the amendments in the Law of the security organizations and possible call of non-confidence for the incumbent government. There are still about 1,5 weeks to go and it is still possible to collect other 60% of the signatures needed in case Latvian electorate would be smart enough. In one of my previous inputs I already said that in case 149028 signatures should be collected I would shave my head bold. However, it seems that my hair shall stay intact and it would be a mark that in the 2,37mlj. divided population only about 10% of the citizens are active (out of about 1450 000 eligible electors) and taking part in chores of the civil society - thus how should we call the rest of the 90% of the Latvian electorate?

I leave this question open and keep my fingers crossed during this time that could actually acquire the name interregnum only if there would be the turning of the page of Post-Soviet development, in case there would... .

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Saeima is not the problem

Nevis Saeima traucē valstij, bet gan vēlētājs traucē pats sev

7.aprīļa vēstulē Dienai Indulis Rimicāns apgalvo, ka Satversme nesniedzot skaidru atbildi ne Abrenes jautājuma, nedz arī saprātīga drošības likumu risinājuma gadījumā. Acīmredzot vēstules autoram bija nepieciešami 16 gadi, lai nonāktu pie odiozajiem secinājumiem.Liberālā demokrātijā konstitūcija nav kā rokasgrāmata atsevišķiem politiskās dienaskārtības jautājumiem. Latvijas Satversmes tēvi 1922.gadā nevarēja paredzēt ne Abrenes jautājuma nonākšanu dienaskārtībā, nedz arī Kalvīša valdības vēlmi koncentrēt varu. Proti, liberālas demokrātijas konstitūcija sniedz politiskās rīcības rāmi, kura ietvaros varētu tikt pārstāvēta esošās sabiedrības uzskatu daudzveidība un risināti dažādie politikas dienaskārtības jautājumi. Rimicāna kungs bez padziļinātas analīzes apgalvo, ka, pirmkārt, demokrātijas vaina Latvijā slēpjoties likumdošanas un valsts varas patvaļā, un, otrkārt, ka šādi sabiedrība nav apmierināta ar valsts pārvaldi. Mēs http://www.politika.lv/ diskutējām par autora pirmā uzstādījuma patiesajiem iemesliem un uzskatām, ka otrā uzstādījuma apelācija pie Latvijas sabiedrības atspoguļo bezatbildīgas vēstules autora ilgas pēc ideāla risinājuma, kas atspoguļotu visu sabiedrības locekļu intereses. Līdzīgi domāja arī XX gs. 20.gadu Vācijas jurists Karls Šmits, kurš, pamatojoties uz Ruso vispārējās gribas principu, uzskatīja, ka parlamentārisms nevar reprezentēt tautu, bet tikai kropļo tās gribu. Proti, Šmits uzstāja, ka Reihstāga darbība traucē valdīt un tikai tad, kad tautas griba sakrīt ar varu, iestājoties patiesa demokrātija. Šo teoriju izmantoja Hitlers, Musolīni un Staļins. No nacisma pieredzes mācoties, piemēram, šodienas Vācijā ir jēdziens Streitbare Demokratie. Tā ir sapratne, ka liberālisms Satversmes ietvaros nedrīkst sagraut pašu liberālo konstitūciju. Šādi mūs mulsina Dienas redakcijas pārliekais liberālisms. Eiropas rietumu daļā ir pieņemts, ka avīzes un mediji pārstāv noteiktu ideoloģisku strāvojumu, tāpēc, tēlaini izsakoties, liberālā Diena, publicējot šādu vēstuli bez attiecīga komentāra, patiesībā zāģē to zaru, uz kura tā pati sēž.Patiesībā Valsts prezidenta rīcība Satversmes 72.panta ietvaros bija labs piemērs, ka Satversmes tēvi ir bijuši gana viedi un varas līdzsvara mehānisms Latvijā strādā. Satversmes ietvaros Valsts prezidents ar savu rīcību ir devis likumīgu iespēju Latvijas vēlētājam nodot parakstus un, iespējami piedaloties referendumā, izteikt savu viedokli par drošības iestāžu likuma izmaiņām un valdošo koalīciju. Šādi nevis Saeima traucē valstij, bet gan vēlētājs traucē pats sev, nespējot pieņemt brīva pilsoņa pienākumus pašpārvaldē.

Dr. Axel Reetz un Veiko Spolītis, politologi

Thursday, April 12, 2007

New revelations prior the pre-referendum procedure

Yesterday, almost at the end of the ''Kas notiek Latvijā" TV emission Jānis Domburs was showing the agreement between V and S parties. This morning this agreement with shaded names, dates and signatures was published in the Latvian language Delfi. On top of that, one party of the agreement came to the Latvian TV evening news LIVE emission whilst the second party sits in the jail now. Aye, aye, the jailed person is the former maire of Ventspils, and the second party to the agreemt is the former leader of the Latvian Social Democratic Party Mr. Juris Bojars, who actually is among the very few public persons in Latvia who admitted that he collaborated with the KGB.

Mr Bojārs revelations were pretty straightforward althought there were no sensations. He did not disclose the sums involved and admitted that during last half a year he felt that Mr Lembergs was pretty much out of his mind already. Also Mr Bojārs concluded that unstoppable wish to be in control everywhere about everything and lechery doomed Mr Lembergs. Mr Bojārs lashed out against Mr Šķēle and concidered him even worse than Lembergs. In the meantime he never question legality of the maire of Ventspils basically lobbying the Latvian politics throughout the 1990's. Also Mr Bojars was knitting conspiracy theories about the prosecutors office. In his usual manner he was trying to show his omniscient ego in the TV emission and the emission rather unexpectedly lasted instead of 10 minutes about half an hour.

All in all, what did I conclude from the late news on the Latvian TV? First, it is unacceptable to me to simply conclude a'la Mr Bojars, that while there were no stringent laws about embezzling public funds in the 1990's , that Mr Lembers cannot be taken as an black sheep because he voted for Latvian independence and he has cleaned the town ofVentspils. Such way of thinking is legal and moral relativism, because even schoolchildren do understand that with the monies of the Ventspils Nafta he could have layed streets in his town with golden cobblestones.

Second, the fact that the TV late emission was running for half an hour shows that the tactics of the prosecutors office is wise indeed. It means that first they needed to find one big fish. After such big fish in the cage also other jackals should start speaking, thus gradually letting the prosecutors office to legally try also other perpetrators of graft in Latvia.

Finally, there is a hope in the spring air that the Latvian citizens are woken up not only from the winter lethargy but also from the political nihilism. Yesterday the Central Electoral Board announced that 20 000 signatures or 1/7 of the number needed for the calling the popular referendum (149087 needed) is collected already. There are another 3 weeks to go and folks in this country arrive to perfomr their citizen's duties usually at the last moment. Shall see & fingers crossed for Latvian citizens being able to turn the post- Soviet page of development.

Lai veicas!

VS

Monday, April 9, 2007

Easter time

Practicing Christians celebrate their most important religious festival these days. It is a public holiday in Lithuania and Latvia today, and Estonians are already busy with their daily chores. I do understand that Catholic Lithuania is having an official holiday today. Also I do comprehend Lutheran Estonia and Finland working today. But there is one thing I do not really understand, why Latvia is suddenly thus religious? I do not consider myself as practicing Lutheran, but it somehow feels that the national composition is somehow reflected also in the religious bahavior of the Latvian people in the post independence period.

Officially majority of Latvian population belongs to Lutheran church, but since the end of the World War II massive exodus of the Catholic Latgalians took place to the labour hungry industrial centers of Riga, Jelgava, Liepaja, and Ventspils. If the census of 1935 indicated that 90% of Catholics lived in Latgale, then the census of 1991 indicated that only 45% of Catholics resided in Latgale. It is interesting, perhaps should go throught the Latvian Statistical office yearbook and look for the data, to see the religious dispersal of different Christian denominations in Latvia today?

In the meantime Catholic churches have been sprouting in once traditional Lutheran areas all over Latvia. Just driving on Via Baltica one may notice Catholic church being built in Iecava, there are buildings consacrated already in Salaspils, Saulkrasti and even remote Salasgriva. Vatican has obviously more money, and also Lutheran church in Latvia does not unite thus many people, because of the generation cleavage. Is it because Latvian society is more traditional, more individualistic or simply less orderly? I do not know, but it was spectacular to see hundreds of young Poles mixing with their elderly compatriots in churches on Sundays in Nowy Sacs. Here, in Latvia you mostly see elderly people going to the church on Sundays. When there is Xmas or Easter one may notice flocks of folks arriving to show off in the church.

Why is it so in Latvia and also in Estonia? Traumata of the atheist Soviet period, relatively new national history and culture or all these factors combined? Anyway, regardless of the lack of church goers and civic participation in Latvia and Estonia in comparison with Lithuania and Poland, both conutry sets represent almost as identical data of economic performance. The sheer size of Poland and more sustainable rate of development in Lithuania makes me to argue that in the long term LTU and POL will be more prosperous that EST and LAT. Such prediction might change due to external impact or internal tumults. Latvia is still having its interregnum and Estonian government looks solid from the distance. International economy is not the healthiest one today. There are changes around the corner and actions of Baltic governments shall determine how unscathed the Baltic states economies shall exit possible turmoils.

Friday, April 6, 2007

Back in Riga en route to Tallinn

Arrived home safely and it was a pleasure to meet all of your during these two rich days in Riga! Actually it is a cold weather back here with blizzardous storms raging at night. Upon arrival took my father and went to the local election center in Salaspils and gave our signatures for initiating popular referendum in Latvia concerning the amendments in the law of security organizations. If circa 150 000 signatures should be collected and referedum should have an overwhelming support (55% of the electors of the last elections) of the President Vaire Vike Freiberga proposed veto of the law, then she will have a legitimate cause to disband the Saeima. There are turbulent times all around the Central Europe, crisis in Ukraine & Hungary, minority government splitting in Lithuania and interregnum in Latvia.

Shall see how it all will be resolved, because in the meantime Estonia has a new government and Matti Vanhanen also included Greens in his new government coalition negotiations. Allrigh, so much about the politics and I better sit in the car now and go and see old buddies leaving for Tibet - India - Nepal - Pakistan - Iran cycling tour. ehh, uhhuduur fellowship has its blog open and you can find their contemplations (only in Estonian:) on my blog link list as Baltic friends. Ok, nägemiseni Tallinnas!

Monday, April 2, 2007

Brussels via Paris

The tripp from Stuttgart to Bruxelles went fine except the fact that I slept in European capital and train attendant woke me up departing Bruxelles South station. Whilst travelling with the TGV it meent that the next stop was Paris...and after 1,25 hours I found myself in the Paris North station. Luckily next TGV back to Brussels went within an hour, and after a loop of about 800 kilometers and additional 3 hours I stepped out from the train in Brussels.

While on the train my cellular phone battery went dead, and it meant that I did not have an address where my sister lives. I told taxi driver to drive to the Latvian Embassy. Typical Brussels taxi driver had no idea where the embassy is, and he cannot be blamed for that in the city where EU and other embassies flourish. So driver told me to tell him the address, because otherwise he was not going to take me to the embassy. I explaned that my phone battery is empty, thus asked him to contact his collagues. After verbal wrangling he finally did that and I was taken to the embassy. Regardless of Sunday I still thought that someone could sit in there but I was wrong. Went accross the street to the Algerian Embassy and the guy sitting there was of no help either.

So, there is a milk restaurant nearby Latvian embassy and I decided to sit down and ask people for possibility to call or find a public phone. Folks in the restaurant were helpful indeed and I could phone home and tell my mom to tell my brother in law the name and the street of the milk restaurant. While having my leffe and nachos fortes in about half an hour I saw Raimonds and pop arriving, thus I was saved.

Yesterday we went out to the Brabant county to see Waterloo. It is nicelly illuminated at night and reminded the time when Gatis took me there for the first time. Waloon cock flag was bravely flying over the place as always. With the little Marta and other relatives we went to Heysel part of Brussels today to see the Mini Europapark. It was my first time there and I found that the Baltic states representing Paks Margareeta, Brivibas piemineklis and Vilniaus Universitetas slot is positioned just next to Finland and opposite from Sweden and Denmark. Very strategically wise decision - chapeau! In the meantime Hungarians and Slovenes do not have their symbols shown yet, thus Baltics is small but mobile, nice!

Tomorrow I am flying back to Riga. In the meantime we shall probably go to Leuven tonight to have a beer or two in the central square there. Good, finaly going home, because I am tired after European globetrotting. Plus, it is good I got out in the Brussels South station because the TGV went further to Amsterdam, huh, huh.

Talk to many of you in Riga soon then!