[ad_1]
I. Šimonytė, appointed future prime minister, stated in the program “Dienas pjūvis” of the tv3.lt news portal that so far the names of the candidates for ministers cannot be revealed and that the work program of the future government may correspond what the president calls the welfare state.
About a month and a half ago, President Gitan Nauseda called on the parties to announce candidates for key government positions so that he could orient himself. Will he continue to mislead the head of state or can he post multiple names?
I can’t really post any names. But yesterday we met with His Excellency, and he certainly did not feel disoriented. I think we speak very well.
Have you discussed specific names for ministerial positions?
Some surnames sounded, but they did not sound like those surnames that are guaranteed, because I have already said many times these days that we will not agree on people until we agree on the works. Some of the surnames that were mentioned in public, sometimes from internal sources, and some parties were also named as a shadow cabinet, sounded behind the table.
The president has also said that he will approve only those candidates whose provisions are in line with the vision of the welfare state. Have you already spoken to coalition partners whose candidate attitudes are in line with the vision of the welfare state?
We have not yet examined anything in the field of the welfare state. I was not examined by the president yesterday either. I think that leaving aside that so-called welfare state, in which we can accommodate different concepts or different content, have a deeper discussion than we do, and I think that both the coalition partners and the president, we are more or less the same. May the people of Lithuania be safe and satisfied with the life here in Lithuania.
The president has promised to present his political agenda in the formation of the government. Have you already sent it?
Somehow I have heard that the president is going to present in more detail his proposals for a welfare state. But I think there will also be a discussion, already in terms of the cabinet and the government’s program, later on about what the president would imagine or what he would suggest to answer. But the government program will first be negotiated by the parties, who must reach some kind of coalition agreement for the government program to emerge in general.
Generally speaking, when you negotiate with fellow party members and coalition partners, have you already agreed that when building a welfare state, you will first have to think about how to divide the pie, not how to increase it?
We have already agreed with our comrades, but I think we will agree with the other parties that we must first agree on what we want. Only then calculate how much it costs. We cannot calculate the price when we do not know the item itself. We cannot go to the supermarket and say that I am willing to pay € 5, but the question remains what I want to buy.
The same goes for the welfare state, public services, and taxes. So we are talking about what is financed through taxes or other public funds. First, we must agree that we are pursuing certain goals in education, health, social security, then agree on a price on these commitments and then distribute that price fairly to different groups in society.
How are you going to distribute that price? Your liberal partners are going to cut personal income tax, does that mean you will propose an increase in value added tax?
There is certainly no talk of any specific tax change proposal, and I think they won’t be there now. We cannot talk about taxes in isolation from other issues. There is no separate tax issue. That is what we will be discussing. We must first agree on what we want to achieve in areas that are the responsibility of the state or that are publicly funded, and only then talk about what taxes are needed to ensure it.
Minister Aurelijus Veryga invited his candidate for Minister of Health to come and share his experience. You reacted to this as if Aurelius Veryga wanted to take responsibility for himself. Why did you react so much? Isn’t it just your attempt to rid yourself of responsibility, the reluctance to speak now?
It is very surprising that such a desire arose suddenly. The word “amazing” comes from the connotation that amazes me so much. Because Minister Veryga has been invited to our group many times, his colleagues have been invited to refuse to come and provide information on what is happening, what measures are in place, what plans are to be made.
And now suddenly, after the elections, Minister Veryga, who is not even acting in office, the Government is still in full operation and receives a salary for his work, decides to share responsibilities with a future government that has not yet been formed. I would suggest that the Minister do his job as he should and then of course hand that job over to the new Minister, in keeping with the traditions of democracy and goodwill.
Given the relevance of the coronavirus, it was perhaps still important to hear what the minister wanted to say, so he immediately rejected his perhaps benevolent proposal.
It would be good to hear that, but I prefer to hear what the experts and the people who have to work with the Minister’s decisions “on the ground” have to say.
Do you have an alternative coronavirus control strategy? What we have heard in the public space is that he consults more with experts, which apparently everyone has planned or plans to consult with experts. But how specifically will your strategy and tactics differ from those of this government?
The main difference will be that this will not be an activity of the performance of a minister in a public space without fully explaining his decisions. These will be the solutions that the experts will propose and those that will not be limited to what is prohibited today or tomorrow, but also to explain to the public what the objective is, what the expected result is and what the next steps will be. accepted.
If the Minister of Health or the Minister were a representative or representative of the Union of the Fatherland, would Jurgita Sejonienė be the most realistic candidate for this position?
I will not name any candidate as the most realistic. Jurgita Sejonienė is a great specialist.
If there was a dispute with one or the other liberal over the position of health minister, would it be a priority for the National Union to keep that position?
It would be a personal priority for the homeland union or mine to have someone in this position who has the public trust.
It is about cooperation with the Social Democrats, they have mentioned it themselves. Say, that cooperation in your absence in the coalition, what could it mean? Would you like a government position, perhaps on a committee of the Seimas? Still, they would ask for something. Would that be such an altruistic collaboration between them?
Some positions for non-majority parties belong to the statute. There are committee vice presidencies, there is an Audit Committee, there is an Anti-Corruption Commission, that is, in accordance with certain principles described in the statute and there is no one of any position here, at least I have not heard that demand. I think there are issues on which I think a wider circle of support is needed, and perhaps the Social Democrats would be willing to offer that support on one issue or another. This does not mean absolute support for the Government.
What are you going to do differently with the Astrava nuclear power plant, which is likely to be commissioned very soon?
Now, perhaps the most pressing issue is the methodology of trade, which for some reason the Minister of Energy is trying to push very urgently. We are already doing our best to ensure that such decisions are not made in the last few days, because there is no guarantee that the signing of such a methodology will not pave the way for Astravas electricity in Lithuania. This would mean that the law is not being applied and, at the moment, to the extent that the efforts of our current opposition can achieve, we are trying to achieve the implementation of the law that is in force in Lithuania.
And, in general, is there a methodology that does not allow the electricity generated at the Astrava nuclear power plant to appear in Lithuania?
There is a certain agreement, a certain prior methodology that has been signed and where Lithuania is physically at the top of those connections, it certainly had enough guarantees to enforce its law. And for whatever reason, someone had to try to change that methodology and cover it up with some kind of certificates issued by the Russian Federation that we can trust in the same way as many other things issued by the Kremlin authorities.
Will the new government have different priorities in terms of foreign and security policy?
I believe that the overall transatlantic direction will not and should not change. There may be more support, more activity or help for the Eastern Partnership countries, for Belarusian civil society.
Perhaps less admiration for the Chinese regime, investment, and the threats it carries. But the general direction, which must be agreed with the president, among other things, because it is an area that is being implemented jointly, certainly should not change anything radically.
The National Union and all other parties have signed a memorandum on strengthening defense and increasing funding. I hope that the commitments are fulfilled and maintained.
How fast will the national defense budget and defense funds increase?
It all depends on the context. When we have a budget as the outgoing government has drawn up, with all the challenges in that budget, we will not be able to make any major changes to it. To the extent my initial assessment allows, this is a 2% commitment. GDP and a little more is running on that budget.
Now we will probably have to confirm it, at least in this position as it is. Next, a very clear plan must be drawn up on how we can strengthen our capabilities, taking into account both purchases and decisions about the renewal of armaments and other investments that are needed to strengthen the defense.
Can you predict when the national defense budget will hit that 2.5 percent?
Homeland Union is committed to making this happen in 2025. But a lot also depends on our ability to reconcile all the problems that the Government will have. And sadly, there will be more than one of those problems at a time. I think the match will definitely aim for that.
President Gitanas Nausėda said he wanted and intended to actively participate in national politics. Are you happy with this message? Are you skeptical?
I look at this message in a very neutral way. I believe that all participants in the Lithuanian political field have the right to actively participate in politics, and when we discover what that activity means, it will be possible to appreciate something more. It doesn’t scare me, it doesn’t make me happy, or it makes me feel special in some other way.
[ad_2]
