|
Trešdiena, 09 Decembris 2009 13:12 |
Honourable ladies and gentlemen,
Honourable supporters, as well as those who have a different opinion,
Seven years have passed since the congress of the People’s Party at which I gave up my mandate as chairman and allowed the next chairman to head the People’s Party, which at that time was well-organized and full of vitality. In doing so, I felt two emotions, both of which were gratifying.
First, I felt satisfaction about Latvia. The People’s Party had successfully mobilised society for the tasks which at that time were the most important for Latvia – I mean the EU and NATO accession processes.
Second, I felt satisfaction about the People’s Party, which at that time was a team of the best and most successful political leaders, a team which had no equals in Latvia’s politics. It was a team capable of working patiently to reach long-term goals and of responding to any short-term problems.
I need to talk with you before I assume the office of the chairman of the People’s Party. My speech will be based on the questions and recommendations raised by rank-and-file party members during our meetings. This is not the time for me to keep quiet.
You need to hear me directly so that you can evaluate my strong and weak points before you express your position regarding my candidacy. Many rank-and-file party members have requested me to assume the leadership of the People’s Party. Why did I accept this challenge?
I feel a sense of responsibility because I was among the founders of the People’s Party. Even while I was a rank-and-file party member, I felt a sense of responsibility. I represented the People’s Party, a party whose leadership, unfortunately, did not heed the viewpoint of the majority of its members, a viewpoint that contains a heartache about Latvia, about this depressed, demoralised, indifferent and fragmented nation. We all are rank and file members of this nation. Each of our heartaches constitutes the heartache of all of Latvia. Such is today’s Latvia, a country with an aching heart, a heart which has little room for joy, pride and self-confidence.
What has happened to the People’s Party, which is a seemingly small societal unit, is similar to that what has happened to all of Latvia. The People’s Party is a small societal unit like a class in school, a family or a choir. If confusion, discontent and lack of faith prevail in one’s immediate environment, in the family or at the work place, we are of no use to ourselves or to society. But if we motivate ourselves and encourage each other, then we are able not only to achieve more for ourselves but also to help others. And that is exactly what people expect from us.
That is how I understand the responsibility of a rank and file member. I am ready to assume this responsibility, and I invite you to do the same – to take on responsibility for our country.
I agree with those who say that if the People’s Party is strong, active and decisive, then Latvia will be able to get rid of the servant’s syndrome, of complaining and political impotence. In short, if the People’s Party shows the way, Latvia will follow.
The Latvian people should be mobilised for new tasks. But people can be motivated to work only if they see a purpose – a purpose for living in Latvia, for working, paying taxes, starting a family, saving up for one’s old age and for one’s grandchildren. When the purpose is lost, the desire to live and work in Latvia is also lost. Then hopelessness and despair become daily companions; people leave Latvia not to earn money and send it back home – now they take their families with them.
Politicians should assume most of the responsibility for the current emotional state of society.
Let us recall that the bankruptcy of the Banka Baltija and the deflation of the Russian ruble caused us to stumble, but we got up saying: “That’s nothing; we are strong.” In a short period of time, we joined the EU and NATO. We were the so-called Baltic tigers. That lasted until the end of the previous year when, like a bolt out of the blue, politicians announced the news about the unavoidable fall into an economic abyss. This summer before local government elections, the Prime Minister declared that the lowest point of the crisis had been reached. We stopped believing that when we heard the same statement the following month, then after three months and then five months later.
It became clear that the incumbent government is headed by an economic analyst rather than a statesman. People were consumed by hopelessness. Unfortunately, Latvia is a country where the number of people overwhelmed by hopelessness is increasing.
Latvian politicians have learned to change the meaning of words. Thus, for example, brutal cutting of the budget is called “budget consolidation”; shutting down of schools and hospitals is called “optimisation”; merging two ministerial departments is called “structural reform”. If the politicians are unwilling to call spade a spade, how can we expect any sensible actions from them?
When Latvia joined the EU in May 2004, it had attained a major objective that was necessary for achieving long-term goals. Our country gained an opportunity to create its prosperity while being a member of the world’s most powerful economic organisation – an organisation which is based on human rights, freedom of expression, justice and the rule of law.
After joining the EU, we were in a state of euphoria and full of hope. And at that time we adopted a decision with enormous long-term consequences. Without asking anybody’s advice, we delegated to international financial sharks Latvia’s sovereign right to determine its own monetary policy.
What does that mean? It means that no country has ever managed to preserve the ability to implement its own monetary policy and keep its currency rate stable while allowing free flow of capital. When Latvia joined the EU, capital found a new and unexplored territory in which international banks could dictate their own rules to capital markets. Latvia was flooded with loans in euros. Even the country’s growth was subject to commercial loan rates. One could predict that the increasing private debt would exceed the national budget and the GDP. That is exactly what happened – an irresponsible dereliction of duty.
We must remember that Latvia’s economic structures proportionally correspond to the EU’s average level; thus there is no need for special measures to avoid excessive risks. Nevertheless, the present government, guided by its fiscal goals, is adopting tax policies which create huge risks. There is no basic tax law which currently is not being “opened” for amendments, amendments which will decrease people’s standard of living, make the production process more expensive, reduce competitiveness and most definitely will not attract investors.
With regard to freedom of the press, Latvia ranks 15th among 175 countries of the world. One might infer that Latvia’s society is self-confident and responsible, but such is not the case. Our nation is experiencing growing pains. What kind of growing pains? The inhabitants of Latvia are among the most pessimistic in the EU. Nine out of ten inhabitants believe that our government is steeped in corruption. Our people lack definite goals and cautious optimism.
In the absence of understandable goals for whose sake the rank and file members of society would be ready to participate just as they did during the EU and NATO accession process, the people of Latvia were not motivated to accumulate and form the nation’s social capital. With regard to this indicator, Latvia ranks 99th among 104 countries.
Of course, you understand that I am not talking about money. I am also talking about corruption, which is a significant component of trust in the relationship between society and the government. Social capital includes friends and like-minded persons. It includes responsibility to one’s family and trusting one’s neighbours. It means membership in a sports club or a choir; it means membership in one’s church. Social capital can be characterised by society’s degree of trust in the representatives of the government and NGOs – be it a policemen, doctor, judge or environmental activist. The major part of Latvia’s society is split into atoms. Therefore, the people of Latvia have difficulty in forming their own opinions either by themselves or after discussions with family members and friends. Currently, most of Latvia’s citizens do not form their own opinion. They buy it from newspaper columns and TV yellow journalism, which have replaced serious analysis. And the worst thing is that many individuals do not realise that they are borrowing the opinions of others instead of working out their own independent viewpoints.
In a democratic society, the political elite is responsible for making sure that the country’s common goals are understood. Unfortunately, in Latvia this matter has not been on the agenda. The political elite remembers this only during election time when it seeks re-election. Other members of the political elite ridicule those re-election seekers for seemingly immoral previous conduct. In the absence of a generally accepted vision for the nation’s development during such a serious crisis, we can lose the country.
In order for a small team to reach its goals, it must be well-organised, well-disciplined and morally strong. Each member of the team must be excellent. It does not matter whether one is a president, farmer, doctor or janitor. The most important requirement is to be excellent, to autograph one’s work with excellence.
In order to become excellent, we must first assume responsibility – responsibility for our work and our contemporaries. Only then we will be able to help our people regain self-esteem. Only then we will be able to form Latvia as a country whose sovereignty is genuine and undeniable. Latvia has to renew faith in itself as a country par excellence – so excellent that even if one ignores us as a small country, one cannot ignore our excellence. No one will be able to disregard it; it will have to be respected and acknowledged.
Our most fundamental values – our national pride, moral values, Latvian family traditions and the historical memory of the Latvian people – will have to be respected and acknowledged. These values are hard to destroy even by the most liberal propaganda. They are hard to undermine by attempts of the most unsuccessful governments or by ambitions of the most dishonest politicians. The only thing that brings sense into our endeavours is our belief in these ancient roots.
Latvia is the only country in the world where the Latvian language can take root, where it can develop and perfect itself. At best, any major language nation considers us, Latvians, as a small group of people with a certain ethnographic value – nothing more. Because of our current problems, they probably see us as a tiny but annoying splinter.
We must be able to manage our country by ourselves, not with the help of creditors. It is the duty of each of us who consider ourselves as Latvians to unite ourselves in a common and responsible understanding. We will be able to exist as a nation only if there is Latvia, together with its Latvian culture, its Latvian language, and its living historical memory. We will continue to exist if we preserve our Latvian distinctiveness that stems from our history – such as the solidarity of the Baltic Way, the tradition of commemorating the dead, the tragic destinies of Latvian legionnaires, and our Song Festivals. We will be able to protect, preserve, and maintain all this if Latvia takes its place among the family of outstanding countries. This means that we have to join this group of highly developed nations.
According to the latest available data, we are currently ranked among the first 50 nations on the human development index. We ought to bring Latvia up to the group of the first 30 nations, which includes European Union countries such as Slovenia and Greece. That means we must be able to compete with the Czech Republic, Cyprus, and Malta, which are all lagging behind among the top-40 nations. This must be done for the sake of the future of the Latvian people.
Why are we so bad at running our own country?
To answer this question, we need to take into account various aspects. Latvia accomplished two important tasks very quickly. On this day exactly seven years ago, Latvia received at the Prague Summit the invitation to join NATO. In December, it will be seven years since Latvia successfully closed accession talks with the European Union. At that time, many people thought that the hard work was finished.
People with moral authority in Latvia regarded that their role was to become moral judges. Of course, the easiest way was to judge the political parties that made up the government and the Saeima. Notwithstanding the fact that the renewed country had only a little more than 10 years of experience in developing democracy, political parties were neither supported nor educated nor spared. On the contrary, various experts rebuked and lambasted our inexperienced governments as if they were teenage waiters. “Figures comparable to the welfare level of the EU should be achieved faster”, sounded like “Waiter, hurry up and serve the meal”.
Demands to divide what had not yet been earned were enormous. At the same time, the right of the executive branch to exercise power was repeatedly infringed. There was a systematic trend to limit the government’s influence on processes for which politicians were directly responsible before the nation. Each more or less significant bureau of civil servants eagerly aspired to the status of a partially or fully independent institution. Latvia is a parliamentary democracy, and having overlapping functions of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches is unacceptable.
Functional subordination of numerous executive institutions, various committees, and bureaus to the government lies within the government’s competence. We need to restore the vertical subordination and responsibility of the executive branch. Power without rights is a parody of power. It is political clownery.
If we assume responsibility and expect others to hold us responsible, we also need to have the right to exercise this responsibility. Representatives of the executive branch are directly responsible for the tariff policy, for the consequences of supervising Parex bank, for specific cases of bribery, and for the effectiveness of criminal prosecutions. Those who are granted rights can be held responsible.
Instead of balancing the responsibility and the rights of the executive branch, in Latvia they play populism-driven games of democracy. We are the only country in the world that holds open-door sittings of the Cabinet of Ministers, and we are the only parliamentary democracy in the world that allows voters to dissolve the parliament. What else will we invent in the name of democracy in order to continue being so unique?
Why at a time when parodies should stop are our intellectuals pandering to the crowd and to populists?
Instead of using their reputation and knowledge about democracy, intellectuals are actually acting in concert with destroyers of the state’s foundations. The great demand by the media for resorting to lynch law and holding show trials actually conceals a frightening lack of understanding that numerous representatives of the fourth estate have about its responsibility for developing a democratic and civil society.
There is another important issue to which I want to draw attention and for which a solution should be sought, especially in the context of the national anniversary that has just been celebrated. This issue is the actual independence of the Latvian state. Only if we are truly independent, we will achieve our principal goal, namely, to be outstanding, to be an exemplary small nation.
In the 21st century, independence does not mean having a subsistence economy but rather the ability and will to take decisions autonomously and to assume responsibility. In the 21st century, the words “independent Latvia” must become a synonym for a self-confident nation, export-capable economy, an educated and demographically flourishing population. Latvia must become an exemplary small nation.
In order for Latvia to become outstanding, we have to carry out five major tasks. First, Latvia has to ensure the development of the people. Second, we have to develop manufacturing. Third, we need to ensure a rational energy supply. Fourth, we must be able to manage our country’s finances by ourselves. Fifth, public administration ought to be streamlined.
The most important task is to ensure the development of the people.
In our modern world, it has become simple to buy an object, say, a table or a computer. It takes only a few minutes to find the necessary hardware and its manufacturer on the Web. In our contemporary world, the most important thing is intellect and its living bearer, i.e., the human being.
We need healthy and educated people who are motivated to work. Thus, the goal of restructuring the education system should be to open the doors of higher education to versatile children who are capable of making judgments. Teachers have a significant role and responsibility, but the level of prestige accorded by the state to teachers is very low. Their knowledge, experience, and skills are also resources. If the country wants to use these resources, it should pay for them.
Today approximately 65% of teachers receive a monthly salary below LVL 200 (after payment of taxes). Such remuneration is not competitive either in terms of responsibility or in terms of the specific skills that society expects from a teacher. However, the whole chain of education is interconnected.
None of our universities can be found among world’s TOP 1,000 universities. I believe that this is the result of errors committed in the education administration system and of problems related to academic personnel. The job assessment of the Latvian minister of education should include a component as to whether the University of Latvia is among TOP 100 European universities.
Health care is a sphere in which no country in the world can completely satisfy society be it France or the United States, Sweden or Latvia. The progress of science has created a technological revolution whose cost no state budget has been able to afford; this situation creates major challenges for politicians. General human considerations are especially important because in this sphere the insufficiency of money is felt more acutely. Thus, politicians will ultimately be forced to define the set of services for which society is required to co-pay and to leave the rest to individual responsibility and often, unfortunately, to fate.
The professional level of Latvian doctors is very high. The same can be said about the technological equipment. With such a meagre budget, managing this sector becomes a process of taking away money from one need and giving it to another. That goes on all the time. There is no clear legal framework for reforming the medical sector; results depend on the relevant minister’s influence and his/her ability to obtain the desired share of the budget, thus, this is an excruciating process for society as a whole and one that does not inspire trust. Latvia’s health care system is a sphere where patients’ “gifts of gratitude” exist and where money from the state budget is being squandered. That has to stop!
In the index of the life expectancy of newborns, published by the UN, Latvia ranks 87th in the world. And this is not merely an issue about the health care system – not at all. It is an issue about an individual’s responsibility for his/her own health. It is primarily a matter of lifestyle. Doctors, even if they perform miracles, cannot help people who are not willing to take care of their health. It is also a global problem that enormous resources are wasted to save individuals who do not have the willpower to take care of themselves. Thus, it is also a responsibility that no one else can assume – the responsibility to take care of oneself.
It is vital to continue support for reproductive health and social guarantees for families with children even if it is a bad year for the budget – these supports are essential in preventing a decline in Latvia’s population.
If we hope that a labour force will come from countries with even worse living conditions, we also have to understand that vacancies will be filled by other languages, cultures, social experience and religions.
The second most important task is development of manufacturing.
Latvia’s national economy is based upon both the traditional, Latvian lifestyle economic model and 21st-century industries with the most up-to-date achievements and high added value.
A demographically growing nation will enable us to develop the spheres of production for which we have raw materials, work experience accumulated over many decades, mentality and constant demand in global markets.
Agriculture and forestry are branches whose potential is used only partially despite the fact that their contribution to the export of end products is the largest.
Only 11% of the whole Earth has arable land. It is a huge asset, and Latvia has it. The number of consumers is constantly increasing. Every year more than a billion people worldwide suffer from hunger. But Latvia cannot even meet the milk quota allocated for it by the EU.
Of course, with regard to the global food market, we cannot say that it is fairly and financially reasonably regulated. However, if it remains unregulated, it will be inhuman. It will become a financially reasonable market only when the taxpayers’ money for each ton of manufactured production is allocated regardless of whether it has been produced by a German, Danish or Latvian farmer. Latvia must be able to maintain its potential for self-sufficiency concerning agricultural products that are natural, unmodified and healthful.
Countries which supply our Earth with oxygen – and Latvia with its forests is among such countries – should enjoy certain benefits with regard to the amount of oxygen-producing forests per one inhabitant.
We should not rejoice over money that is received from the trade in CO2 quotas because that would significantly reduce the possibility to develop industry in Latvia. The amount of oxygen that is produced should form the basis for a fair international regulation concerning the maintenance of this important function. In order to achieve such a regulation, Latvia has to become a country to which others listen.
Latvia has to become a self-confident country which has a substantiated position.
Pharmacy, wood chemistry, biochemistry and exact sciences are spheres in which we have intellectual potential. By using the European Union’s resources that are available to us during this period, the country has to achieve support for recognised brands and competitive products.
The third most important task is in the field of energy. Of course, 100% self-sufficiency in the field of energy sounds pleasing to the ear, but we must admit that it cannot be achieved at economically reasonable costs, and it is also not necessary. A well-integrated Latvian energy supply system – a network of connections with Scandinavia, Russia, Belarus, and via Lithuania with Poland – is important
The unique infrastructure of gas supply enables Latvia to withstand foreign policy-related problems in any winter. Nevertheless, additional gas supply-related possibilities should be carefully considered in order to increase the level of Latvia’s self-sufficiency. Such a reasonably balanced energy policy will prevent any politician – local or foreign – from threatening us.
The fourth block of issues concerns finances. With regard to this issue, we were frightened by the collapse of the financial system because of the budget for 2009-2010. I am confident that the state’s ability to define its own policy for supplying the national economy with money is just as important as the government’s duty to implement a reasonable tax and budgetary policy.
Those who say that during the pre-crisis years it was possible to create fully sufficient reserves in the national budget have obviously forgotten mathematics. I was not a supporter of many of Prime Minister Kalvītis’ political decisions, but I want to remind you of something so that politicians do not live like amnesiacs: Prime Minister Kalvītis left a financial surplus of LVL 117 million in the national budget.
In order to cover the deficit that the next governments had to deal with when drafting the budgets for 2008, 2009 and now when drafting the budget for 2010, the surplus should have been at least LVL 2.2 billion. We know that it was not even theoretically possible.
The loud politicians from the newly established political organisation Unity forced Mr. Godmanis to shred the remaining tiny surplus of LVL 117 million during the pension referendum in 2008. The People’s Party could not prevent it. When a crisis could already be felt in the air, the most destructive politicians supported the referendum on increasing budget expenditures. If the budgets of 2010 and subsequent years are based on wrong decisions or politically convenient lies, Latvia will not become a prosperous country.
Before today’s congress many people asked me: “But why didn’t you speak about this earlier?” And then I realised how short our memory is. How soon everything is forgotten! Obviously, the comparison I presented in 2007 in a lecture to our leading economists that the Latvian economy is like toad which is slowly boiled was not successful because the press acidly rebuked me for premeditated “amphibian torture”.
What can I say today?
I think that we have to take a completely different path, a path towards recovering our economy. We do not have to squeeze out the last lat from our companies; on the contrary, we have to multiply our lats by circulating money more quickly. It would be more reasonable and self-confident for Latvia to become the most tax-friendly country in the EU so that when tax systems are compared, Latvia leaves its nearest competitors behind by at least 0.5% points.
It would definitely allow us to keep the GDP redistribution, including taxes and dues, at 35%.
It will force us to reform the state administration and make it more efficient.
It will allow the people themselves take decisions regarding their family budget.
It will make our finance minister change his rhetoric about our reserve for increasing taxes because in Latvia the tax burden is lower than the EU average.
It will mean that we will be the most business-friendly state. That will motivate business people to work and invest here and thus promote quicker recovery of the state by encouraging production.
It will mean balancing the budget not by strangling but by stimulating our economy.
For a set period of time, e.g., five years, we have to create a simple system for micro-enterprises. If a family is able to employ itself and one or two other persons and if the annual turnover of this micro-enterprise does not exceed LVL 5,000 per person, let’s allow them to work. Let’s exempt them from senseless scrutiny by the State Revenue Service, let’s exempt them from filling out absurd statistical reports, paying corporate and personal income taxes and visiting dozens of state officials.
If a micro-enterprise is able to exist, if the people working there are not requesting social benefits, and if their activities inspire at least some of the 160,000 unemployed persons, the state should be grateful to these entrepreneurs. These self-confident persons will have taken responsibility for themselves, their family and the state as well. Someone will ask: how can we allow someone not to pay taxes? Of course, we should not exempt them from all taxes. But I would like to ask you the following question: why has the state itself invented the euphemistic term “scholarship” for what is actually a salary? The only difference is that people probably do not learn any business skills by performing community service.
By decreasing the tax rates, we will increase the tax revenue. Right now we have to resolve to repay all state debts and regain our financial independence within the next five to seven years. We have to get out of the debtors’ prison in which Latvia is incarcerated and guarded by the IMF.
A balanced budget has to be adopted in 2011. I believe that, as Prime minister, I would be able to draft such a budget again, and I believe that Latvia would be able to implement it.
The use of EU funds and relevant regulatory measures must be reconsidered in principle and in essence. Waste of EU financing, or simply embezzlement, is not acceptable.
Today it is imperative to maximally invest these funds in the infrastructure. The state’s attempts to halt the construction of several infrastructure objects that are important to the state must be regarded as criminal. The delay in starting real work in insulating buildings is also unacceptable. If there are no roads, ports, airports, energy supply systems or railroads, who would want to develop production here? Moreover, building state infrastructure would also decrease the unemployment level.
There is no certainty that there will be a responsible solution with regard to Parex bank. More than a billion euros from the national budget have been invested there. I think that the current financial stabilisation programme should be called a service programme for financial lobbies. The slow sucking out of bad loans will poison our economy for a long time. As long as the banks have not cleaned out their bad loans, Latvia’s economy will remain infected.
The agreement with the IMF does not contain measures that stimulate economic growth. From the viewpoint of a self-confident Latvian businessperson, this agreement is a failure. However; it is advantageous from the viewpoint of a Scandinavian bank’s representative.
So whose interests do the negotiators with the IMF really represent?
The people who are to be blamed for the depth of the current crisis in Latvia are now trying to turn the discussion about the need to devaluate the lats into speculations about personal interests, including mine. I am one of those who called for a timely devaluation; otherwise, the crisis in Latvia would be not only deep but also long. I stand for responsible politics, and I have no other interests.
Intelligent people learn from the experience of others; others learn from their own mistakes. In the beginning of the 1960’s, Ireland could not brace itself to devalue its currency. When the government chose to significantly cut budget expenditures, thousands of people were fired from work. Because of unemployment and the crisis, 380,000 people left Ireland. The state was withering. Then, after Ireland realised that it had made a mistake, it devalued its currency several times. The last devaluation which took place in 1993 was clearly oriented towards increasing the state’s competitiveness. And now we can see the results – many people are going there to work and even to live in this country of welfare – Ireland.
Unskilful regulation and management of the currency market has deepened the global economic crisis in Latvia. I understand that the current national budget will comply with the IMF’s requirements, and thus I have become sceptical that currency devaluation will have a rapid effect. It seems to me that if the currency is devalued tomorrow, we would have to require double responsibility from the Bank of Latvia – responsibility for untimely devaluation of the currency and responsibility for devaluation at the most inopportune time.
Latvia should not dream about being in the eurozone until its national economy recovers and the national finances are put in order. Currently, national needs are funded directly by huge loans issued by the European Commission and the IMF. The amount of the money in the national economy is catastrophically insufficient. The circulation of money has stopped.
I am certain that by reducing the VAT rate we would encourage greater consumption. People would buy the food that is needed for subsistence, and they would pay off their debts for public utilities. The circulation of money would resume, and tax revenues in the national budget would increase. The beneficiaries would be the budget and the people.
During the People’s Party’s conference on the economy, which was held in August, I proposed 10 ways to stimulate the national economy. They could have been used as the basis for planning next year’s budget. Unfortunately, they were not. It seems that we are living in a swamp – a swamp of obsession, deafness, incompetence, and plain political lies, a swamp of disbelief.
The fifth issue that is the most important and that affects everyone is public administration. The public services that are provided to people and businesses are of low quality. The reorganisation of administration is done in a chaotic and unsystematic manner. The civil servants who work in ministries in Riga are consumed by thoughts of their self-importance as they carry out this process. There is no unified policy.
At the same time, administration on the regional level should be regarded as the most important; it should integrate the administration of counties and the state. The current approach, whereby everything is handled in Riga, attests to the archaic nature of our public administration in this 21st–century era of technology. Administrative and territorial reform should be strengthened by significant reorganisation of public administration. The Prime Minister has indicated such a need; however, he has not specified what he means by that, and he has not designated it as a priority. That would require consolidated and responsible work by the government.
While this government has at least some resources, it should use them.
We have to help our coalition partners to regain their self-confidence.
I will not talk about the run-over hedgehog anymore. We have to help Prime Minister Dombrovskis to move forward and not fall into the abyss even if the path to welfare he has chosen is not the straightest or the fastest.
At present, I urge the Prime Minister and the President to take concrete action. These top public officials who have assumed responsibility for the correctness of the chosen path and who are going along that path with an increasing burden of national debt should calm down the people who have been left without means of subsistence, food and shelter. No one should freeze to death on the streets this winter! No one should be left without food! Action should be taken to help each desperate family! Action should be taken to stop desperation. Action should be taken to help people to regain their self-esteem.
But now about us – about the People’s Party. Seven long years have elapsed, and many things have changed.
Where has the ability of People’s Party gone to develop proposals, to defend them and to convince our political partners about their validity? What has happened to our ability to freely discuss any political issue? I will pose a more direct question: Why does the People’s Party addresses its agenda only through the prism of temporary usefulness of a given moment or a specific problem? Why? It is because our leaders regarded their personal achievements as self-evident –just like Latvian basketball stars who consider their personality to be more significant than the achievements of their team.
It is because the team training events – political conferences, seminars, thematic brain-storming session and discussions with experts – are currently not characteristic of the People’s Party.
Ministers often represent only their own department. Unawareness of the agenda of the Cabinet of Ministers has become the accepted norm. Thus there is actually no policy on the national level. Instead, there are only departmental politics and interests.
Of course, professional excellence in a certain sphere helps the relevant minister to become a leader in that sphere. However, Party leaders in the past have made serious mistakes by nominating candidates for a ministerial post without assessing their professional qualification. As a logical result, the lack of professionalism has kept them from achieving any respectable results in the political arena.
One can say that it is only natural to make mistakes. Mistakes have occurred, and they will continue to occur. The worst thing is to pretend that we don’t see these mistakes and to stubbornly refuse to correct them. If the People’s Party gives someone a minister’s mandate, it should be able to take it back. It is not an automatic right to be a minister.
I have an opinion about the People’s Party parliamentary group as well. Two things have changed. One of them has to do with the ability to restrain one’s ambitions when assuming responsibility for common goals and to ensure effective discipline.
That reminds me of a symphonic orchestra. Although I respect each member of the People’s Party parliamentary group, I have the feeling that it is not a professional symphonic orchestra in which everyone is precisely reading the music sheet and thus producing a harmonious sound. I have the feeling that we are listening to an endless cacophony of instruments tuning up before a concert. In a real orchestra, one of the instruments is usually not tuned – the cymbals. However, in the People’s Party parliamentary group it seems that there were people who wanted to sound the cymbals at the right and wrong times. The reason was simple – one would be noticed. But let us remember – the sound of cymbals never is the basic tune.
The second thing I’ve noticed has to do with the content of a policy. Previously, the People’s Party parliamentary group was not afraid to express its opinion even if it knew it was the minority viewpoint; nevertheless, it expressed it with good argumentation, with clarity and in a single voice. It was able to clearly justify this opinion to the public. Now there is the feeling that the absence of content is often expressed by unsubstantiated and wrong actions. Thus it is no wonder that an MP has to feel embarrassed in front of journalists because his vote is contrary to common sense. However, in order to please some reporter for a daily newspaper, the parliamentary group votes against the political platform of the People’s Party and thus leaves the majority of People’s Party rank and file members confused.
I would like to revive the true meaning of the rank-and-file member concept. To be a rank-and-file member means to be in the ranks. Life in a confused crowd or, what is even worse, life in mutually fighting groups should be ended. People’s Party members should be prepared to be members of strong and proud ranks. We have to assume responsibility and revive our self-confidence in order to shape a self-confident nation – a truly independent and excellent nation. That sounds nice, doesn’t it?
I am not a magician. I am a person who works, who works hard. I am ready to invest my time and energy to achieve this goal. And in order to achieve it, I first have to reinstate order among the supporters of the People’s Party. That will take time, but, unfortunately, there is no time. I have to act quickly. I request the Congress, concurrently with the resignation of the chairman, Mareks Segliņš, to suspend the mandate of the Board of the People’s Party. In order to restore and consolidate our ranks and to use the potential of the members of the People’s Party more effectively, I propose that the Congress establish a new body – a Council of the Board consisting of 15 people, with 3 representatives from each region.
The People’s Party is rooted in Latvia’s small towns and villages. The fate of each region is just as important to us as the fate of our capital. We will value the opinion expressed by a farmer in Cēsis, a medical doctor in Bausaka, a teacher in Baltinava, a logger in Dundaga and a locksmith in Riga. We have to be able to ferret out what is rational in the suggestions expressed by retirees, students and new mothers.
It would be helpful if the Board of the People’s Party were smaller, more compact, more unified and more decisive. Thus I invite the Congress to amend the Articles of Incorporation so that it will be possible to establish a Board consisting of five members; such a Board could rapidly and decisively define positions of the People’s Party on issues that are important to Latvia. I ask you to support my proposals for the composition of the Board.
I am ready to work as the Chairman of the People’s Party, together with Vineta Muižniece, Vents Krauklis, Māris Kučinskis, and Edgars Zalāns. They are well-known politicians of the People’s Party. Each of them has different but complementary characteristics and abilities. When deciding on giving your vote of confidence to me, you have to make a decision about them as well.
The new Board will have to assume responsibility for analysing mistakes and for drafting precise proposals of the People’s Party for the government and the Saeima. More detailed and technical proposals of the People’s Party should be worked out by the time of the next Congress, which will be held in May. By May, we have to establish a broad dialogue with professional organisations concerning issues pertaining to the national economy.
The People’s Party should re-establish a dialogue with social partners on education.
We have to regain the support of public organisations regarding the state administration. We have to maintain an active dialogue with editors, reporters and analysts of the mass media.
I urge the Congress to establish the post of Deputy Chairman of the People’s Party because a significant volume of work will be required to explain our opinion, to establish a dialogue with our political partners and opponents, and to represent the People’s Party publicly.
I am certain that these changes will enable the People’s Party to work more responsibly during the next half year.
We cannot make the same mistakes in personnel policy again. We cannot agree to support short-sighted initiatives without serious analysis even if somebody considers them as the only way to save Latvia.
Only when People’s Party has been able to resist populism it has been able to make hard but necessary decisions – for example, the Border Treaty with the Russian Federation, regional reform, etc. These were the most broadly publicly discussed issues, and the course of discussions was determined by the active position of the People’s Party. These were the issues which were the most frequently discussed with the rank and file members of the People’s Party.
Why do I mention the scornful concept of rank and file members so often? Because all of us are rank and file members in the large ranks of Latvia. Once we were able to join our hands in an unbroken chain of the Baltic Way and to stand close to each other in the Mežaparks demonstrations. But now we are confused and broken apart; we are scattered throughout the world; we stand for ourselves, not one for another and one for all.
Changes are imminent in the People’s Party. The ranks of our party will be purged. There are too many useless growths surrounding our oaks and lindens. A party membership card is not carte blanche for incompetence when assuming an office. There should be no more discussions about that! That must stop!
If all of you are ready for all of that, I am also ready to accept your trust. If there is anyone who is not ready for this work, if he/she thinks that he/she will be able only to observe and criticise, then it is better to leave this hall right now. Latvia will have enough observers next year. In the ranks of the People’s Party we need industrious and honest people; we need patriots and optimists. All of us have to assume responsibility for Latvia. That is the responsibility of our rank and file members!
Thank you for your attention. |
|
Nedēļas citāts
|
Māris Kučinskis: "TP darbs opozīcijā ir ražīgāks nekā valdībā." |
|
