Since January 13, 2009 political events in Latvia are developing very quickly indeed. Riots followed peaceful political demonstration in the Riga Dome square. I was in the middle of the crowd and reported about the events to the Estonian Broadcasting Corporation. Since those ominous events there are plenty of discussions in the Latvian mas media about the causes that took gangs of rioters to the streets. It seems that that governing coalition party members and particularly the speaker of the Saeima do not really understand what is happening outside their power bubble. Messrs. Daudze and Segliņš simply blamed opposition parties for daring to organize demonstration that was attended by some 10-20 thousand peaceful demonstrators. Instead of critically analysing causes for demonstration and riots that followed government members continued to spread their smug announcements until 12:30CET on January 14, 2009.
On this day the Latvian president had a press conference. Upon his return from Strasbourg the previous day the president announced the number of tasks the parliament has failed to deliver, and set the March 31, 2009 deadline for parliament and the government to comply. Rather unexpectedly the president concluded that if the parliament and the government would not be able to deliver this time, then he would use the powers entitled upon him in the Latvian constitutional Art. 48.
The announcement was thus unexpected that the incumbent Minister of Interior announced that president has delivered an ultimatum, and the speaker of the Saeima interpreted the announcement, "that the president is entitled to ask the parliament instead of demanding from it", reminding the public about the omnipotence of the Saeima in the parliamentary republic.
Nevertheless, the events have developed very quickly and since January 17, 2009 the People's Party (TP) announced that they consider president's resolution as too inconsistent, thus demanding the snap elections immediately. Just finished watching the LNT TV program "vox populi" and there also Latvian Transport Supremo announced that he agrees with Mr Segliņš. Furthermore all party representatives that participated in the TV program basically agreed that snap elections in Latvia is the fact now! The only question now is about timing, because the president has announced the March 31 deadline, but at least two coalition members want snap elections right away.
Reasons for TP and LPP/LC parties to have snap elections immediately are rather trivial. In case snap elections would take place immediately, it would mean that they would take place without amendments in election law, that the president has demanded in his January 14, 2009 announcement. Also both parties breached the law in the October 2006 elections, and because of their failure to comply with the election campaign limits both parties owe the state treasury around 2 mlj. EUR.
Tomorrow political parties will hold consultations with the president. Upcoming snap elections is the fact now and the question is whether new parliamentary elections would take place in June 6, 2009 together with the municipal and European Parliament elections or after the summer in early September? Slimming of the government is being discussed and the PM left for Korea leaving the Transport Minister Šlesers as the acting PM. The situation is changing constantly and both coalition and opposition members are testing their tactics prior the triple elections. Elections tactics, retirement of the post soviet political elite and new persons coming into the stagnated political realm in Latvia will be the next topic to discuss about.
P.S. For those of you reading Estonian here is my Postimees article from January 15
P.S. Here in the Estonian Broadcasting Corporation program ``Vabariigi Kodanikud`` I participated on January 16., 2009.
Showing posts with label referendum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label referendum. Show all posts
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Contemplations after the Latvian referendum summer
Latvian public had to live through two referendums last August. In representative democracy there is no real need after referendums, because referendums would intrinsically show that MP's are unable to reach a consensus in some issue. Perhaps my conclusion would sound to harsh, but "the referendum culture" is viable only in Switzerland and in some Western states in the US. Referendum traditions have developed there as combination of historic development and structural absence of the established political system. Thus, the referendum culture does not really exist in other West European states, because the legitimacy is founded in the quality of the representative democracy. For example, West Germany after passing its Grundgesetz in 1949 specifically tried to avoid developing the referendum culture. Simply its recent past and the example of an Austrian from Linz achieving his political summit through techniques of plebiscite democracy made the FRG politicians to conclude that referendums would only be giving bonuses to demagogues (prämie für Demagogen). Regardless of the suspicious FRG politicians referendums have been making small inroads into the political culture of the Central and East European states.
Grand issues of independence or joining the EU are obvious questions for plebiscitary referendum to take place. When there are issues of language, security or pension laws discussed in referendum it obviously raises the issue - why politicians in Latvia cannot agree on such issues in the parliament? Answer is simple, while issue of language law or non-privatization of the energy monopoly (Latvenergo) took place during the 1990's, when the political system was still democratising, the questions of security and pension laws as well as constitutional amendments in August 2 were caused due to consequences of stolen elections in October 2006. Since August 2006 the trust in democratically elected representatives in Latvia has started its downward slope.
Latvian political culture shows a specific trend. There is a clear correlation between the slump of governing elite's credibility since the last elections, and increased activity of civil society through referendum campaigns. Namely, the opposition parties in Latvia are not taken into consideration. Simply the governing coalition follow the abstract and taken out of context notion of "democracy being simply the majority rule". Instead of developing the culture of debates in the parliament, and consolidating ideologically distinguishable parties in left-right or freedom-authority nexus there is nothing of this kind in Latvia. The totalitarian and Karl Schmidt'ian notion of inability of the representative democracy to represent the interests of the pople, and thus, the culture of caring about the abstract nation (tauta, das Volk, narod, rahvas) still prevails in public domain in Latvia. Such culture inescapably fosters the culture of populist politicians. Populism is the only way to achieve the recognitions in the Latvian utterly stagnated political establishment.
There are now two new parties formed. The Civic Union is considered as the right wing conservative party, while the Society for Other Politics (SCP) is a socially liberal party. Onset of both parties is intimately connected with referendum issues, because for an opposition member there is no way to brake out of the mediocre discussion culture in the Latvian Saeima. Thus, both new political parties were active in supporting the referendum activities. The Civic Union and also the SCP founders were actively supporting the cause for the referendum of the August 2, that would have given the 1/10 of the Latvian electorate the right to initiate the procedure of dissolving the parliament. The Civic Union was not supporting the August 23 referendum campaign where the SCP was the initiator of the campaign together with the Social Democratic party and the Pensioners Federation.
The first referendum campaign failed because the needed quorum was about 150 000 short. Organizers of the referendum after their loss blamed the Central Election Bureau for organizing the referendum in summer, when most of the folks are vacationing. This is very dubious excuse, because the initiators of the referendum (Free Trade Unions) should have known the procedure. The procedure clearly states, that after the needed signatures for initiating referendum campaign are submitted to the parliament and parliament gives it a go, the referendum should take place no earlier than a month or no later than two months after his date. Thus, if the Trade Unions really wanted this referendum to succeed, then they could submit the signatures in Autumn and referendum would have taken place in early Winter. Anyway, the date is not the only issue. The fact that about 900 000 eligible voters did not budge shows very much that the traditional population did not comprehend the significance of the constitutional amendments, and also that the same population either is totally alienated or their basic material needs are met (bottle of vodka, bread and sausage and NO WAR is enough as the traditional proverb goes:).
The second referendum campaign would have made the present governing coalition finally start reforming the Latvian stagnated fiscal policies. Unfortunately, the second election campaign was also about 100 000 signatures short. In the last moment the Pensioners Federation and its outspoken leader Aina Verza withdrew their support. The reason for the lack of support of the prime "potential beneficiaries" was unexpected. The government and the ministry of welfare was creating the horror scenarios explaining that the possibly successful referendum campaign would destroy present pension payment system. Thus, the traditional Latvian voters listened to the simple reflex of survival, because the trauma of continuous transformations since the collapse of the USSR is too heavy. I personally met several elderly ladies in Salaspils who were openly saying that they want to believe in the new proposals of the SCP and referendum organizers, but they better stick to the old ways, because "they at least know that system and after all their representatives would not allow them to die immediately" (funny isn't it:). The referendum organizers did indeed envisage termination of the existing governmental practice to borrow from the social fund whenever there was a need to have a balanced budget. the latter practice allows all these years the Latvian government to continue its status quo governance, and not to worry about the burgeoning government apparatus. Borrowing from the social fund at times when about 200 000 pensioners have hardships in keeping ends meet to support the burgeoning class of administrators is both immoral and utterly irresponsible.
Only about 325 000 people considered it so, whilst the rest of the Latvian electors trusted promises of the government to rise the minimum unemployment rate from 45 to 60Ls prior referendum, and to act decisively if the economy should stall. Now the economy has really stalled (even the Bank of Latvia envisages the 0,5GDP growth this year, and that is the fall from 13GDP growth in 2007(!)) and it appears that both the Prime minister and the Minister of Welfare lied about the rise of the minimum rate of unemployment benefit, and also about decisive actions at times when economy stalls.
This Wednesday Kas notiek Latvijā TV emission clearly showed that Ivars Godmanis was lying. Amidst his number crunching tirades Valdis Dombrovskis (MEP-JL) and Gatis Kokins (SCP) asked the head of the cabinet, why the government does not keep their promises? The PM exploded in rage and suggested that both politicians should better learn mathematics... .
Instead of having a smart economist to support his arguments, he had a visibly drunk (a sober person would not constantly slip his tongue) Minister of Finance Atis Slakteris (TP) next to him. The traditional number crunching, ridiculous shallowness of arguments, and his intrepid style of answering questions makes me reckon that the PM still has not learned to delegate responsibilities, and therefore he does not see the broad picture of governing the EU state. The fact, that PM announced the freeze of promised salary rise for teachers, doctors, and policemen in 2009 prior consultations with the employers confederation heads and the trade union representatives makes me to assume that the inside deals of the top notch politicians and civil servants are more important than the social stability, unfortunately. Also, rather ironically, Mrs Verza from the Pensioner's Federation anounced this week that they will probably have to call for their member's emergency caucus, because the government had lied about the determinantion to increase unemplyment benefits. Now the referendum is over, and with it the only possible way to force the MP's and ministers to govern responsibly. Thus, the only rational issue one may expect from the present coalition government is to continue to sustain their own welfare. And all this amidst expectations of striking doctors, teachers and policemen.....very, very sad.
P.S. The news just came out that the Social Integration secretariat with 48 civil servants (it had only two (!) employees in 2002, when it was founded) instead of doing their assigned work use taxpayers monies to employ private contractors for doing their job... . Also the top notch civil servants remuneration system makes the Latvian civil service the second most expensive after Cyprus, huh, uhh. This will definitely make me to write about the civil service, remuneration system and rationale of governance in Latvia next time.
Grand issues of independence or joining the EU are obvious questions for plebiscitary referendum to take place. When there are issues of language, security or pension laws discussed in referendum it obviously raises the issue - why politicians in Latvia cannot agree on such issues in the parliament? Answer is simple, while issue of language law or non-privatization of the energy monopoly (Latvenergo) took place during the 1990's, when the political system was still democratising, the questions of security and pension laws as well as constitutional amendments in August 2 were caused due to consequences of stolen elections in October 2006. Since August 2006 the trust in democratically elected representatives in Latvia has started its downward slope.
Latvian political culture shows a specific trend. There is a clear correlation between the slump of governing elite's credibility since the last elections, and increased activity of civil society through referendum campaigns. Namely, the opposition parties in Latvia are not taken into consideration. Simply the governing coalition follow the abstract and taken out of context notion of "democracy being simply the majority rule". Instead of developing the culture of debates in the parliament, and consolidating ideologically distinguishable parties in left-right or freedom-authority nexus there is nothing of this kind in Latvia. The totalitarian and Karl Schmidt'ian notion of inability of the representative democracy to represent the interests of the pople, and thus, the culture of caring about the abstract nation (tauta, das Volk, narod, rahvas) still prevails in public domain in Latvia. Such culture inescapably fosters the culture of populist politicians. Populism is the only way to achieve the recognitions in the Latvian utterly stagnated political establishment.
There are now two new parties formed. The Civic Union is considered as the right wing conservative party, while the Society for Other Politics (SCP) is a socially liberal party. Onset of both parties is intimately connected with referendum issues, because for an opposition member there is no way to brake out of the mediocre discussion culture in the Latvian Saeima. Thus, both new political parties were active in supporting the referendum activities. The Civic Union and also the SCP founders were actively supporting the cause for the referendum of the August 2, that would have given the 1/10 of the Latvian electorate the right to initiate the procedure of dissolving the parliament. The Civic Union was not supporting the August 23 referendum campaign where the SCP was the initiator of the campaign together with the Social Democratic party and the Pensioners Federation.
The first referendum campaign failed because the needed quorum was about 150 000 short. Organizers of the referendum after their loss blamed the Central Election Bureau for organizing the referendum in summer, when most of the folks are vacationing. This is very dubious excuse, because the initiators of the referendum (Free Trade Unions) should have known the procedure. The procedure clearly states, that after the needed signatures for initiating referendum campaign are submitted to the parliament and parliament gives it a go, the referendum should take place no earlier than a month or no later than two months after his date. Thus, if the Trade Unions really wanted this referendum to succeed, then they could submit the signatures in Autumn and referendum would have taken place in early Winter. Anyway, the date is not the only issue. The fact that about 900 000 eligible voters did not budge shows very much that the traditional population did not comprehend the significance of the constitutional amendments, and also that the same population either is totally alienated or their basic material needs are met (bottle of vodka, bread and sausage and NO WAR is enough as the traditional proverb goes:).
The second referendum campaign would have made the present governing coalition finally start reforming the Latvian stagnated fiscal policies. Unfortunately, the second election campaign was also about 100 000 signatures short. In the last moment the Pensioners Federation and its outspoken leader Aina Verza withdrew their support. The reason for the lack of support of the prime "potential beneficiaries" was unexpected. The government and the ministry of welfare was creating the horror scenarios explaining that the possibly successful referendum campaign would destroy present pension payment system. Thus, the traditional Latvian voters listened to the simple reflex of survival, because the trauma of continuous transformations since the collapse of the USSR is too heavy. I personally met several elderly ladies in Salaspils who were openly saying that they want to believe in the new proposals of the SCP and referendum organizers, but they better stick to the old ways, because "they at least know that system and after all their representatives would not allow them to die immediately" (funny isn't it:). The referendum organizers did indeed envisage termination of the existing governmental practice to borrow from the social fund whenever there was a need to have a balanced budget. the latter practice allows all these years the Latvian government to continue its status quo governance, and not to worry about the burgeoning government apparatus. Borrowing from the social fund at times when about 200 000 pensioners have hardships in keeping ends meet to support the burgeoning class of administrators is both immoral and utterly irresponsible.
Only about 325 000 people considered it so, whilst the rest of the Latvian electors trusted promises of the government to rise the minimum unemployment rate from 45 to 60Ls prior referendum, and to act decisively if the economy should stall. Now the economy has really stalled (even the Bank of Latvia envisages the 0,5GDP growth this year, and that is the fall from 13GDP growth in 2007(!)) and it appears that both the Prime minister and the Minister of Welfare lied about the rise of the minimum rate of unemployment benefit, and also about decisive actions at times when economy stalls.
This Wednesday Kas notiek Latvijā TV emission clearly showed that Ivars Godmanis was lying. Amidst his number crunching tirades Valdis Dombrovskis (MEP-JL) and Gatis Kokins (SCP) asked the head of the cabinet, why the government does not keep their promises? The PM exploded in rage and suggested that both politicians should better learn mathematics... .
Instead of having a smart economist to support his arguments, he had a visibly drunk (a sober person would not constantly slip his tongue) Minister of Finance Atis Slakteris (TP) next to him. The traditional number crunching, ridiculous shallowness of arguments, and his intrepid style of answering questions makes me reckon that the PM still has not learned to delegate responsibilities, and therefore he does not see the broad picture of governing the EU state. The fact, that PM announced the freeze of promised salary rise for teachers, doctors, and policemen in 2009 prior consultations with the employers confederation heads and the trade union representatives makes me to assume that the inside deals of the top notch politicians and civil servants are more important than the social stability, unfortunately. Also, rather ironically, Mrs Verza from the Pensioner's Federation anounced this week that they will probably have to call for their member's emergency caucus, because the government had lied about the determinantion to increase unemplyment benefits. Now the referendum is over, and with it the only possible way to force the MP's and ministers to govern responsibly. Thus, the only rational issue one may expect from the present coalition government is to continue to sustain their own welfare. And all this amidst expectations of striking doctors, teachers and policemen.....very, very sad.
P.S. The news just came out that the Social Integration secretariat with 48 civil servants (it had only two (!) employees in 2002, when it was founded) instead of doing their assigned work use taxpayers monies to employ private contractors for doing their job... . Also the top notch civil servants remuneration system makes the Latvian civil service the second most expensive after Cyprus, huh, uhh. This will definitely make me to write about the civil service, remuneration system and rationale of governance in Latvia next time.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
Oblivion in the post-soviet welfare society
Regardless of the numerous signals about a sick state of the Latvian economy (look just into the latest BICEPS report by Alf Vanags and Morten Hansen or latest synopsis of Edward Lucas in The Economist), majority of Latvian citizens (about 1 million eligible voters) feel satisfied enough and seem to be oblivious about the sorry state of their economia (houshold in Greek language). Current and trade account deficit, inflation rate, stalling economic growth and outpouring workforce are just the most visible data about the sorry performance of the delapidated Ms Latvia. Today, the new president would be oficially sworn into the office, and, that sets in the Latvian "knightly period" (knight translates as ryytel in Estonian) to paraphrase my good friend Mel's expression. In Estonia Lennart Meri established a rather high professional and moral standart for the Estonian presidency, thus the follow up presidency was simply classified as period of Arnold Ryytel. Similarly to its Northern cousin Vaira Vīķe Freiberga established high moral and profesional standards for Lavian presidency. The new president faces titanic task in order to match the previous record, and it will not be an easy task for Valdis Zatlers to consolidate the society where the 30 percent (323 000 people) are not happy about the sorry state of their houshold, and the rest of 70 percent (one million) are ignorant in their petit burgueois oblivion and led by the narrow group of smug manipulators.
The semi-official result of the yesterday's referendum voter turnout is 323479 persons. It is a good result considering that it was a bright and sunny summer day and shows that civil society exists in Latvia. The most active voters were in Vidzeme and Riga metropolitan area whereas the least active were in Latgale. In Ireland and the UK, where allegedly about 100 000 Latvian citizens reside, the turnout was about 200. The conclusion thus is, that the Latvian Irish and the UK contingent has left home very much due to the inability of the Latvian government to ensure their humane development. Adds in the www and radio were only in Latvian, thus native Russian electorate was not addressed at all. Just to compare the 9. Seaima parliamentary elections turnout with the yesterday's referendum one may notice, that the number of dissatisfaction in the society is growing, if one considers that referendum turnout is higher than voter turnout for opposition parties during latest parliamentary elections. Jaunais Laiks (JL) (148602), Saskaņas Centrs (SC) (130887) are opposition parties and together they got about 280000 votes. SC traditional voters reside in Latgale and Riga. It is hard to say, now whether SC electorate was active in Riga or not, but at least all is clear about Latgale. Thus, very robust analysis shows that probably some voters who voted in parliamentary elections for the governing coalition (Tautas Partja (TP) got 177481 and ZZS 151595) showed their dissatisfaction with the bahaviour of the government yesterday. Aye, also the votes of parties that did not overcome the 5% threshold (LSDSP-31725, Visu Latvijai-13469, Jaunie Demokrāti-11505, Pensionāru kop-7157, Eiroskeptķi-3365 =circa 67 000) were divided between other parties that overcame the threshold, and they most probably were among the 323 000 participants in the referendum. vox populi vox dei...and life still goes on after the referendum. Therefore, the question is why the oblivion of the majority of the society persists, and how to develop further in the situation where Kremlin hawks incresingly rattle their sabres, and the US is still bogged down in Iraq and Apghanistan?
The answer to the first part of the question is rather obvious - majority of the Latvian electorate are not educated about the basic principles of self-government in liberal democracy. Together with Dr. Axel Reetz we have investigated reasons for this phenomena and you may read it in German in Aktuelle Probleme postsozialistischer Laender Das Beispiel Lettland (Verlag Wilhelm Surbir, Wittenbach/SG:2007)Axel Reetz (Hrsg.) or in Latvian (Ilgas pēc nevainīgas politikas) in http://www.politka.lv/. However, there are such trivial issues we did not even investigate, and they are cheating at school, at university and to oneself. When person is not sure about him/herself it tries to find several excuses not to face the real facts. Such lying to oneself is endemic in Latvian schools and universities. For several years Latvian Examination Test Centre cannot prevent test information leaking prior the highschool final exams. There were complaints of graduates from the Riga 1. Gymnasium last year, but to no avail, the Minister of Education is indispensable. Average or outright bad students get good grades at the final examination, and they are whopped into universities. Cheating continues there as well, and overstreched staff tries to promote the best minds while mostly burdened with comparing latvianized essays with the English ones in http://www.google.com/. Such half-baked underachievers find their way through the traditional networks of the Latvian society, and the result is that those who cheat believe that everyone does the same, thus promoting the culture of cheating. Thus, the legitimate question now is, for how long can such society that openly preferres vices to virtues carry on like this? I believe not too long.
To answer the second part of the question one must analyse what is going on in the international arena. Russia prepares to go to the State Duma election spectacle at the end of this year and the new Russian president would be elected on March 2008. There will be elections in the US next year as well. Russia has its strategic interests in the Baltic states and they never hid it plus Latvia is the weakest link among the Baltic sisters. The US power is overstreched and supporting weak and corrupt members of the Coalition of Willing cannot continue indefinetly. In order to stand independent in the changing world there must be an orderly situation at home, thus society would be proud about their leadership and easily follow it in order to face the upcoming challenges. Society that does not trust its leadership has no future and ancient Greek struggles between democratic Athens and oligarchic Sparta serves as a very good example here. What do we have at home in Latvia???? You know the answer:-)
The semi-official result of the yesterday's referendum voter turnout is 323479 persons. It is a good result considering that it was a bright and sunny summer day and shows that civil society exists in Latvia. The most active voters were in Vidzeme and Riga metropolitan area whereas the least active were in Latgale. In Ireland and the UK, where allegedly about 100 000 Latvian citizens reside, the turnout was about 200. The conclusion thus is, that the Latvian Irish and the UK contingent has left home very much due to the inability of the Latvian government to ensure their humane development. Adds in the www and radio were only in Latvian, thus native Russian electorate was not addressed at all. Just to compare the 9. Seaima parliamentary elections turnout with the yesterday's referendum one may notice, that the number of dissatisfaction in the society is growing, if one considers that referendum turnout is higher than voter turnout for opposition parties during latest parliamentary elections. Jaunais Laiks (JL) (148602), Saskaņas Centrs (SC) (130887) are opposition parties and together they got about 280000 votes. SC traditional voters reside in Latgale and Riga. It is hard to say, now whether SC electorate was active in Riga or not, but at least all is clear about Latgale. Thus, very robust analysis shows that probably some voters who voted in parliamentary elections for the governing coalition (Tautas Partja (TP) got 177481 and ZZS 151595) showed their dissatisfaction with the bahaviour of the government yesterday. Aye, also the votes of parties that did not overcome the 5% threshold (LSDSP-31725, Visu Latvijai-13469, Jaunie Demokrāti-11505, Pensionāru kop-7157, Eiroskeptķi-3365 =circa 67 000) were divided between other parties that overcame the threshold, and they most probably were among the 323 000 participants in the referendum. vox populi vox dei...and life still goes on after the referendum. Therefore, the question is why the oblivion of the majority of the society persists, and how to develop further in the situation where Kremlin hawks incresingly rattle their sabres, and the US is still bogged down in Iraq and Apghanistan?
The answer to the first part of the question is rather obvious - majority of the Latvian electorate are not educated about the basic principles of self-government in liberal democracy. Together with Dr. Axel Reetz we have investigated reasons for this phenomena and you may read it in German in Aktuelle Probleme postsozialistischer Laender Das Beispiel Lettland (Verlag Wilhelm Surbir, Wittenbach/SG:2007)Axel Reetz (Hrsg.) or in Latvian (Ilgas pēc nevainīgas politikas) in http://www.politka.lv/. However, there are such trivial issues we did not even investigate, and they are cheating at school, at university and to oneself. When person is not sure about him/herself it tries to find several excuses not to face the real facts. Such lying to oneself is endemic in Latvian schools and universities. For several years Latvian Examination Test Centre cannot prevent test information leaking prior the highschool final exams. There were complaints of graduates from the Riga 1. Gymnasium last year, but to no avail, the Minister of Education is indispensable. Average or outright bad students get good grades at the final examination, and they are whopped into universities. Cheating continues there as well, and overstreched staff tries to promote the best minds while mostly burdened with comparing latvianized essays with the English ones in http://www.google.com/. Such half-baked underachievers find their way through the traditional networks of the Latvian society, and the result is that those who cheat believe that everyone does the same, thus promoting the culture of cheating. Thus, the legitimate question now is, for how long can such society that openly preferres vices to virtues carry on like this? I believe not too long.
To answer the second part of the question one must analyse what is going on in the international arena. Russia prepares to go to the State Duma election spectacle at the end of this year and the new Russian president would be elected on March 2008. There will be elections in the US next year as well. Russia has its strategic interests in the Baltic states and they never hid it plus Latvia is the weakest link among the Baltic sisters. The US power is overstreched and supporting weak and corrupt members of the Coalition of Willing cannot continue indefinetly. In order to stand independent in the changing world there must be an orderly situation at home, thus society would be proud about their leadership and easily follow it in order to face the upcoming challenges. Society that does not trust its leadership has no future and ancient Greek struggles between democratic Athens and oligarchic Sparta serves as a very good example here. What do we have at home in Latvia???? You know the answer:-)
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Choosing between oligarchy and Western democracy
Latvia äänesti oligarkkivallan ja länsimaisen demokratian välillä
Julkaistu: 7.7.2007 19:37
Kaja Kunnas
RIIKA. Kymmenettuhannet latvialaiset äänestivät lauantaina kahta turvallisuuslakia vastaan, jotka olisivat taanneet hallituksen ja parlamentin jäsenten pääsyn maan suojelupoliisin tietorekistereihin. Käytännössä moni äänestäjä ei ollut perehtynyt lakien sisältöön, vaan äänesti valtiojohdon yleistä korruptoitumista vastaan.
"Kyllä, korruptio on hyvin yleistä Latviassa", sanoi Porschella äänestyspaikalle Riikan 1. lukioon hurauttanut projektisihteeri Ramona Agruma. "Olen Latvian kansalainen. Halusin sanoa, että olen kyllästynyt", hän sanoi.
Äänestyksessä mitattiin myös kansalaisten luottamusta viime syksynä toiselle kaudelle valitun hallituksen ja parlamentin suhteen.
"En siedä hallitusta", sanoi tutkija Janina Briede, kun oli pudottanut äänestyslippunsa uurnaan ja saanut merkiksi osallistumisestaan leiman passiinsa.
"Pääministeri sanoo meitä koiriksi", Briede sanoi.
Pääministeri Aigars Kalvitis nimitti hiljattain televisiohaastattelussa räksyttäviksi koiriksi kaikkia, jotka arvostelevat hallitusta ja uutta presidenttiä Valdis Zatlersia. Hän uhkasi myös rangaistusta arvostelijoille.
"Vaakakupissa on, haluaako Latvia olla demokratia vai entinen neuvostotasavalta, jota hallitsevat oligarkit. Se on äänestyksen ydin", sanoi politiikan tutkija Veiko Spolitis Riikan Stradinšin yliopistosta.
Oligarkeilla tarkoitetaan hallitsevaa pientä poliitikkoryhmää, jolla on tiiviit suhteet liike-elämään. Nimitys on käytössä etenkin Venäjällä.
Latvialaiset äänestivät lauantaina myös suositun presidentti Vaira Vike-Freibergan puolesta, jonka virkakausi päättyi äänestyspäivänä.
"Rehellisesti sanoen, en tiedä, minkä puolesta sanoin kyllä", sanoi opiskelija Agata Branevska, joka kertoi äänestäneensä tukeakseen presidentti Vaira Vike-Freibergaa.
Kansansuosikki Vike-Freiberga oli virkakautensa loppuajan välirikossa hallituksen ja parlamentin kanssa, kun hän kieltäytyi hyväksymästä kiistanalaisia turvallisuuslakeja.
Hallitus ja parlamentti halusivat lisätä valtuuksiaan suojelupoliisin suhteen vain pari päivää ennen, kuin öljysatamakaupunki Ventspilsin kaupunginjohtaja Aivars Lembergs pidätettiin maaliskuussa. Häntä epäillään asemansa väärinkäytöstä, rahanpesusta ja korruptiosta.
Lauantaina virkakautensa päättäneen presidentti Vike-Freibergan mukaan "poliitikkojen yllä leijuu Damoklesen miekka".
Julkaistu: 7.7.2007 19:37
Kaja Kunnas
RIIKA. Kymmenettuhannet latvialaiset äänestivät lauantaina kahta turvallisuuslakia vastaan, jotka olisivat taanneet hallituksen ja parlamentin jäsenten pääsyn maan suojelupoliisin tietorekistereihin. Käytännössä moni äänestäjä ei ollut perehtynyt lakien sisältöön, vaan äänesti valtiojohdon yleistä korruptoitumista vastaan.
"Kyllä, korruptio on hyvin yleistä Latviassa", sanoi Porschella äänestyspaikalle Riikan 1. lukioon hurauttanut projektisihteeri Ramona Agruma. "Olen Latvian kansalainen. Halusin sanoa, että olen kyllästynyt", hän sanoi.
Äänestyksessä mitattiin myös kansalaisten luottamusta viime syksynä toiselle kaudelle valitun hallituksen ja parlamentin suhteen.
"En siedä hallitusta", sanoi tutkija Janina Briede, kun oli pudottanut äänestyslippunsa uurnaan ja saanut merkiksi osallistumisestaan leiman passiinsa.
"Pääministeri sanoo meitä koiriksi", Briede sanoi.
Pääministeri Aigars Kalvitis nimitti hiljattain televisiohaastattelussa räksyttäviksi koiriksi kaikkia, jotka arvostelevat hallitusta ja uutta presidenttiä Valdis Zatlersia. Hän uhkasi myös rangaistusta arvostelijoille.
"Vaakakupissa on, haluaako Latvia olla demokratia vai entinen neuvostotasavalta, jota hallitsevat oligarkit. Se on äänestyksen ydin", sanoi politiikan tutkija Veiko Spolitis Riikan Stradinšin yliopistosta.
Oligarkeilla tarkoitetaan hallitsevaa pientä poliitikkoryhmää, jolla on tiiviit suhteet liike-elämään. Nimitys on käytössä etenkin Venäjällä.
Latvialaiset äänestivät lauantaina myös suositun presidentti Vaira Vike-Freibergan puolesta, jonka virkakausi päättyi äänestyspäivänä.
"Rehellisesti sanoen, en tiedä, minkä puolesta sanoin kyllä", sanoi opiskelija Agata Branevska, joka kertoi äänestäneensä tukeakseen presidentti Vaira Vike-Freibergaa.
Kansansuosikki Vike-Freiberga oli virkakautensa loppuajan välirikossa hallituksen ja parlamentin kanssa, kun hän kieltäytyi hyväksymästä kiistanalaisia turvallisuuslakeja.
Hallitus ja parlamentti halusivat lisätä valtuuksiaan suojelupoliisin suhteen vain pari päivää ennen, kuin öljysatamakaupunki Ventspilsin kaupunginjohtaja Aivars Lembergs pidätettiin maaliskuussa. Häntä epäillään asemansa väärinkäytöstä, rahanpesusta ja korruptiosta.
Lauantaina virkakautensa päättäneen presidentti Vike-Freibergan mukaan "poliitikkojen yllä leijuu Damoklesen miekka".
NO democracy, just Fishermen's FEST
In this day of reckoning I was heading back from Tallinn this morning and streams of cars were heading to the Fishermen's festivities (Zvejnieku svētki)* in Salacgrīva. It made me cautious about the ability to collect 455000 votes to dissalow quick steering of dilapidated Ms Latvia into murky lands of typical post-Soviet anemie. Now it is 23:23 local time and there is still no news about the end result of the referendum, but it seems that the final score would be short of about 10000 votes. There are Messrss Arnis Kaktiņš, Kārlis Leiškalns (TP) and Mrs Solvita Āboltiņa (JL) in the Latvian TV direct emission now, and the incumbent PM is having his incomprehensive contemplations on the telephone, whilst I am writing this piece into my blog.
While coming back from Tallinn, Estonian countryside reminded me about the fact that Estonia bypasses Latvia in terms of countryside development of about 3-5 years (just compare the almost non existent number of asbestos roofs in Estonia). Agricultural sector is struggling in both states, but there is budget surplus in Estonia since 2001. Thus, there are budget allocations for alleviation of social depression in the Estonian countryside. And why is there budget surplus in Estonia? I am coming back to the , AYE, AYE, the same rule of property and tax declaration system that was introduced in Estonia back (!!!) in 1991. Such system still does not exist in Latvia, and it is still a root cause of the political infighting in Latvia. To put it simply, while there is no mandatory tax declaration system Latvian public is not informed about the basics of the capitalist economic system. Therefore, how come Latvian citizens could keep their public servants&politicians accountable, if they have no clue how their taxes are even collected (remember, that only holders of the public office are obliged to fill out annual tax reports)! I must come back to this discussion a bit later, but right at this moment the fact is, that members of the Latvian post-soviet elite are doing their utmost to secure their posh economic wellbeing prior implementation of the mandatory tax reporting system on January 1, 2008 (at least PM promised that the system shall be introduced that day).
The 300 000 voters who came to the election booths during this sunny day were courageous enough. Preliminary results show that barely 5 % of the public were against the stipulations in the law of the security organizations. Those who were against were perhaps mislead by the question appearing on the election bulletin that was hyper-complicated to the most people I talked to. I am pleased to learn that out of the active part of the demos (about 906 000 voters who appeared at the booths during last parliamentary elections) there are about 30 % of the society who showed their dissatisfaction with the cynical behaviour of the governing coalition. Aye, the result is what it is now (about 330 000 AYE's), but I must come back to the basics of the problem again later (on Sunday:).
Lack of the electors turnout during the summer time means that the timing of referendum was not good at all. The referendum date was decided by the Central Election Bureau, and, show me a government that gives up their power without a fight! In the meantime the existing situation reminds me about the reality, that there are always two two make a tango. Even thou referendum did not pass, it would be strategically very unwise for the government to underestimate dissatisfaction of the 30 % of the very active part of the Latvian society. Vox populi vox dei........and summer time should be spent in preparations for the worst scenario - thus Baltics PREPARE FOR THE AUTUMN!!
In September energy taxes that rose prior the summer should be reflected in increased inflation rate, food prices, and utility bills. Also, subsidized rents for tenants apartments were abolished prior the summer, and when the fall sets in tenants should start to learn about sharply increased rate of their bills. The health of the international economy is not the best one, and after a summer long party I expect a long lasting economic and political hangover in Latvia.
After all, most of those German, Japanese and French new car leasing rates would become hard to bear and probably next year participants of the Fishermen Fest should consider bying a bus ticket or not going to the fest at all....
* Fishermen FEST has its roots in the traditional lifestyle of this hard working profession. The summit of the fishermen festivities were during the Soviet occupation, when fishermen collective farms were hyper-rich in comparison with other sectors of the Soviet agriulture. Thus, they were able to afford excesses of Byzantium like bakhanalias that lasted for many days in a row.
While coming back from Tallinn, Estonian countryside reminded me about the fact that Estonia bypasses Latvia in terms of countryside development of about 3-5 years (just compare the almost non existent number of asbestos roofs in Estonia). Agricultural sector is struggling in both states, but there is budget surplus in Estonia since 2001. Thus, there are budget allocations for alleviation of social depression in the Estonian countryside. And why is there budget surplus in Estonia? I am coming back to the , AYE, AYE, the same rule of property and tax declaration system that was introduced in Estonia back (!!!) in 1991. Such system still does not exist in Latvia, and it is still a root cause of the political infighting in Latvia. To put it simply, while there is no mandatory tax declaration system Latvian public is not informed about the basics of the capitalist economic system. Therefore, how come Latvian citizens could keep their public servants&politicians accountable, if they have no clue how their taxes are even collected (remember, that only holders of the public office are obliged to fill out annual tax reports)! I must come back to this discussion a bit later, but right at this moment the fact is, that members of the Latvian post-soviet elite are doing their utmost to secure their posh economic wellbeing prior implementation of the mandatory tax reporting system on January 1, 2008 (at least PM promised that the system shall be introduced that day).
The 300 000 voters who came to the election booths during this sunny day were courageous enough. Preliminary results show that barely 5 % of the public were against the stipulations in the law of the security organizations. Those who were against were perhaps mislead by the question appearing on the election bulletin that was hyper-complicated to the most people I talked to. I am pleased to learn that out of the active part of the demos (about 906 000 voters who appeared at the booths during last parliamentary elections) there are about 30 % of the society who showed their dissatisfaction with the cynical behaviour of the governing coalition. Aye, the result is what it is now (about 330 000 AYE's), but I must come back to the basics of the problem again later (on Sunday:).
Lack of the electors turnout during the summer time means that the timing of referendum was not good at all. The referendum date was decided by the Central Election Bureau, and, show me a government that gives up their power without a fight! In the meantime the existing situation reminds me about the reality, that there are always two two make a tango. Even thou referendum did not pass, it would be strategically very unwise for the government to underestimate dissatisfaction of the 30 % of the very active part of the Latvian society. Vox populi vox dei........and summer time should be spent in preparations for the worst scenario - thus Baltics PREPARE FOR THE AUTUMN!!
In September energy taxes that rose prior the summer should be reflected in increased inflation rate, food prices, and utility bills. Also, subsidized rents for tenants apartments were abolished prior the summer, and when the fall sets in tenants should start to learn about sharply increased rate of their bills. The health of the international economy is not the best one, and after a summer long party I expect a long lasting economic and political hangover in Latvia.
After all, most of those German, Japanese and French new car leasing rates would become hard to bear and probably next year participants of the Fishermen Fest should consider bying a bus ticket or not going to the fest at all....
* Fishermen FEST has its roots in the traditional lifestyle of this hard working profession. The summit of the fishermen festivities were during the Soviet occupation, when fishermen collective farms were hyper-rich in comparison with other sectors of the Soviet agriulture. Thus, they were able to afford excesses of Byzantium like bakhanalias that lasted for many days in a row.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
NO broad party membership, NO demo - cratia
Yesterday there was a public discussion in the Riga New theatre organized by the Latvian European movement, ELJA, LATO and Transparency Internatioal local organization Delna yesterday. The forum was well attended, but the size of the meeting hall did not allow to grasp the real size of civil society in Latvia. The intelligentsia, emigree Latvians, and leaders of the opposition party Jaunais Laiks (New Era) were omnipresent and discussions were rich. Most of the panelists, profesionally moderated by the TV journalist Baiba Strautmane and using quotes from the George Orwell's Animal Farm, expressed their disatisfaction with the present style of governance. At least two of the panelists, Arta Ģiga and Edgars Šīns, rather omenously pointed out that one issue is the upcoming referendum, but quite another one is what would happen after it?
For the yesterday's forum the major issue was to consolidate dissatisfied part of the society, thus mobilizing them as agents of support for the upcoming referendum. For this purpose actually half an hour would have been enough and, therefore, the forum actually achieved its purpose! But what next? Shall folks be continuously lulled into another oblivion of the slow growth of the middle class, or they would be active deciding for their own future in the globally changing world? Being pragmatist I assume that the first option is the most probable, and the omnipresent oblivion of the "seven fat years" would be shaken off only due to tremours of the international economic system.
Edgars Šīns rememered his on-plane discussion with a European bureaucrat prior the May 1, 2004, and the eurocrat expressed his view that the Baltic States would not join the EU due to the huge size of its agricultural sector. According to international standards the agricultural sector in Latvia is really peanuts, and regardless of the fact, whether you are an efficient entrepreneur or a peasant, the Brussels monies are actually endowing Latvian agricultural sector in a very distorted way today. Aquis communautaure seems not so effective tool to ensure good governance of the new EU entrants, thus the graft and dissatisfaction amidst the overheated economy in today's Latvia. The promulgation of laws as well as civic control of the public servants depends on knowledgeable human resources, but they are hemorragheing out of Latvia (also Lithuania and to lesser extent Estonia)! This allows the governing post-Soviet elite to number crunch any public problem, because they know and scan the ability of the general public to bear the ineffective and robust style of crony capitalism. Therefore it is not internal dissatisfaction but external shocks that would probably change the traditional style of governance in Latvia.
Tremours of the international economy combined with Latvian inflation (8,2%), current account (26%!!!) and trade deficits should in principle make Latvian present political elite members cautios. However, when I follow the reclessness of the economic policy, timidity of the anti-inflationary measures, and behind the screen crony deals I feel really uneasy. Macroeconomic situation in Latvia and also Estonia (it must be admitted) is out of sync due to the cheap credits from mostly Scandinavian banks, and loundered taxes of Russian businessmen. What if cautious Scandinavians would start pulling their monies out? I do not see any reason for this, but they must be convinced otherwise if Russian asertivenes should start boiling over, and the question is when? What, if the Russian depositors in Latvian banks decide unanimously to withdraw their renumerations? There are many whats and ifs in Latvia today. Therefore, it is paramount to keep at least an order in ones own home, which essentially means that in the long term Latvia needs good governance for its very survival as a nation state!
After all, it is probable that the 450 thousand or so citizens would appear in the voting booths in Latvia and its diplomatic representative offices abroad, but then we should return to the question about what happens next? The international system is reshaped today but Latvian political elite has put all its golden eggs in the US basket only. The health of the international economy although prudent is not the healthiest one. One must just follow what happens in the US, Scandinavian and Baltic housing markets and worrisome signs are in all of them. In the meantime, not the best sailors are at the helm of the Ms Latvia rudder. Recless sailing on the board of the dilapidated Ms Latvia in rough waters of international economy may finish on the rocks of economic decline very soon.
To legitimately change the helmsman now, and to prevent similar situation repeating in the future, there is a need for active civic participation. There is also need for people to decide which political party they participate in, because political parties in the representative democracy are the only legitimate contenders for power in the political system. Ilma Čepāne (JL) in the last statement of yesterday's forum reiterated my thoughts, that without broad participation of the Latvian public in political parties there would be neither acountability of the political process within Latvian parties nor in Latvian political system as a whole. The participation of the Latvian public in the public life once during the four year election cycle is among several causes that made the outgoing president to veto the law of security organizations. Latvian citizens once and for all must decide which spectrum of the political system they belong to. In this way they could either found the party of their own, or join existing parties en masse and through the intra-party political debate get rid of the demagogues and oligarchic idiotes (using the meaning of its original meaning in ancient Athens:) Thus paraphrasing the omenous expression of the 19th century founder of the Latvian seafaring Krišjānis Valdemārs there should be slogan for majority of Latvian citizens today - "ejiet latvji partijās!"
P.S. Just after posting this piece of writing into this blog I learned that Alan Johnston (for 140 days kidnapped BBC correspondent) is FREED, good Lord!
For the yesterday's forum the major issue was to consolidate dissatisfied part of the society, thus mobilizing them as agents of support for the upcoming referendum. For this purpose actually half an hour would have been enough and, therefore, the forum actually achieved its purpose! But what next? Shall folks be continuously lulled into another oblivion of the slow growth of the middle class, or they would be active deciding for their own future in the globally changing world? Being pragmatist I assume that the first option is the most probable, and the omnipresent oblivion of the "seven fat years" would be shaken off only due to tremours of the international economic system.
Edgars Šīns rememered his on-plane discussion with a European bureaucrat prior the May 1, 2004, and the eurocrat expressed his view that the Baltic States would not join the EU due to the huge size of its agricultural sector. According to international standards the agricultural sector in Latvia is really peanuts, and regardless of the fact, whether you are an efficient entrepreneur or a peasant, the Brussels monies are actually endowing Latvian agricultural sector in a very distorted way today. Aquis communautaure seems not so effective tool to ensure good governance of the new EU entrants, thus the graft and dissatisfaction amidst the overheated economy in today's Latvia. The promulgation of laws as well as civic control of the public servants depends on knowledgeable human resources, but they are hemorragheing out of Latvia (also Lithuania and to lesser extent Estonia)! This allows the governing post-Soviet elite to number crunch any public problem, because they know and scan the ability of the general public to bear the ineffective and robust style of crony capitalism. Therefore it is not internal dissatisfaction but external shocks that would probably change the traditional style of governance in Latvia.
Tremours of the international economy combined with Latvian inflation (8,2%), current account (26%!!!) and trade deficits should in principle make Latvian present political elite members cautios. However, when I follow the reclessness of the economic policy, timidity of the anti-inflationary measures, and behind the screen crony deals I feel really uneasy. Macroeconomic situation in Latvia and also Estonia (it must be admitted) is out of sync due to the cheap credits from mostly Scandinavian banks, and loundered taxes of Russian businessmen. What if cautious Scandinavians would start pulling their monies out? I do not see any reason for this, but they must be convinced otherwise if Russian asertivenes should start boiling over, and the question is when? What, if the Russian depositors in Latvian banks decide unanimously to withdraw their renumerations? There are many whats and ifs in Latvia today. Therefore, it is paramount to keep at least an order in ones own home, which essentially means that in the long term Latvia needs good governance for its very survival as a nation state!
After all, it is probable that the 450 thousand or so citizens would appear in the voting booths in Latvia and its diplomatic representative offices abroad, but then we should return to the question about what happens next? The international system is reshaped today but Latvian political elite has put all its golden eggs in the US basket only. The health of the international economy although prudent is not the healthiest one. One must just follow what happens in the US, Scandinavian and Baltic housing markets and worrisome signs are in all of them. In the meantime, not the best sailors are at the helm of the Ms Latvia rudder. Recless sailing on the board of the dilapidated Ms Latvia in rough waters of international economy may finish on the rocks of economic decline very soon.
To legitimately change the helmsman now, and to prevent similar situation repeating in the future, there is a need for active civic participation. There is also need for people to decide which political party they participate in, because political parties in the representative democracy are the only legitimate contenders for power in the political system. Ilma Čepāne (JL) in the last statement of yesterday's forum reiterated my thoughts, that without broad participation of the Latvian public in political parties there would be neither acountability of the political process within Latvian parties nor in Latvian political system as a whole. The participation of the Latvian public in the public life once during the four year election cycle is among several causes that made the outgoing president to veto the law of security organizations. Latvian citizens once and for all must decide which spectrum of the political system they belong to. In this way they could either found the party of their own, or join existing parties en masse and through the intra-party political debate get rid of the demagogues and oligarchic idiotes (using the meaning of its original meaning in ancient Athens:) Thus paraphrasing the omenous expression of the 19th century founder of the Latvian seafaring Krišjānis Valdemārs there should be slogan for majority of Latvian citizens today - "ejiet latvji partijās!"
P.S. Just after posting this piece of writing into this blog I learned that Alan Johnston (for 140 days kidnapped BBC correspondent) is FREED, good Lord!
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.
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.
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... .
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... .
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
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
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!
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!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)