Government decisions generate outrage: clear leadership crisis and visible communication, illogical actions towards quarantine – Respublika.lt



[ad_1]

Photo Photo 5

Ingrida Šimonytė. Photo by Stasys Žumbis

During a press conference yesterday, Gintautas Paluckas, a member of the Seimas Social Democrats, stressed that the decisions of the rulers related to the management of the pandemic currently concern both the public and companies.

“Government decisions in recent weeks give the impression that the Government is becoming an unpredictable and unreliable partner for both business and society. The Prime Minister has promised to take personal responsibility, but today we see a crisis leadership, as part of the decisions and communication is entrusted to a board of experts or even individual experts, part to the Minister of Health, part to other ministers … Justify or deny the words spoken. This creates an atmosphere of uncertainty and mistrust, in which we have been living during the last months ”, said G. Paluckas.

According to the politician, support for companies is lower than in neighboring countries. The Social Democrats have proposed increasing support for the self-employed from € 260 to € 390, as the current benefit is the lowest of all neighboring countries, but the authorities continue to ignore the proposal.

“It is good that due to business efforts, the GDP in Lithuania does not fall as much as in other countries, but this is due to the structure of our economy: the most affected tourism sectors in Lithuania represent a smaller part of the economy which, for example, in southern Europe, “said Paluckas.

According to him, government regulations applied to companies are discriminatory.

“It is incomprehensible why some companies cannot work in larger stores when it is possible to trade over the counter in the same market. We understand not only this, but also the people who work in those areas. Solutions are urgently needed. For example, in On behalf of the group and the Committee on Economic Affairs, we want to call for the immediate reinstatement of the rent refund mechanism. There is still no suitable replacement for the previously valid rental compensation system in Lithuania, and the biggest financial burden comes from the rent, it is not suspended or postponed, “said the Social Democrat.

As one of the examples of government miscommunication, the parliamentarian presented the idea of ​​an immunity passport presented to the public, which, according to G. Paluckas, was incorrectly presented and explained to the population.

This is one of the examples of how it is possible to compromise an interesting idea without even being able to explain how it will be applied, what are the pros and cons, because when thrown into the air, this idea has met with great resistance. , which is completely natural and understandable, “said Paluck, emphasizing that people were scared and rejected the idea of ​​an immunity passport due to possible discrimination and restrictions on the freedoms of unvaccinated people.

He was supported by his group colleague Eugenijus Sabutis, who added that sending different messages from different government officials generates mistrust, anger, ignorance and the development of conspiracy theories.

“For example, before Easter, Palanga and other complexes thought they would open, people started booking hotels, etc., and then they received messages that they would remain closed. Or, for example, the commercial opening on April 12. The Prime Minister made peace, saying that “we did not say that we would open it, we did not specifically promise it”, but the communication message was sent to the public clearly: on the 12th everyone is preparing for the opening of the trade, “said E Sabutis.

According to him, for example, regarding the AstraZeneca vaccine, the Minister of Health says one thing in the morning, at night, quite another, about priority vaccination queues, exactly the same thing.

“It is also very” played “with the priority queues. If there are part of the deniers in the priority queue, let the municipality decide for itself what to continue vaccinating, if there are vaccines,” suggested E. Sabutis.



[ad_2]