[ad_1]
The last time on December 23. The Seimas rejected without knocking on the door the resolution presented by the “peasants” on discrimination against small businesses in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic, three opposition groups accused the rulers of dictating and left the plenary hall. After the ruling majority apologized, the opposition factions returned to work half an hour later.
A more moderate resolution was presented on Tuesday asking the government to evaluate the possibility of restarting the small business, but even that caused a storm of emotion.
There were accusations from both sides in the Seimas: the previous government was hampered by emerging from the “worst situation in the European Union”, the peasants were invited to join the sick, and the current rulers were shown “supermarkets” to “close the country for six months.”
Laima Mogenienė, representative of the Lithuanian Union of Greens and Peasants, who presented the resolution, assured that the purpose of the resolution was to clearly tell small businesses: “that Seimas is concerned that in the difficult conditions of the country, it should be take into account the fragility of little people. they are in unfair competitive situations ”.
“Today we present to you a revised amended resolution, which caused stormy events in the Seimas, but I am grateful to the Seimas that an editorial committee has been formed, all the colleagues of the faction, including mixed ones, were delegates,” said L. Mogenienė.
However, representatives of the Union of the Fatherland, the Lithuanian Christian Democratic Party, continued not to support the resolution.
Conservative Mykolas Majauskas spoke out against the resolution: “I understand your concern, but this action is just a vibration of the air, it does not have a real impact on the economy, politics or specific actions of the Government. If you want to help a small business, you sign up with specific fixes, specific suggestions, and if you have no idea how or what to do, you can always volunteer and help. But in reality this resolution is declarative, ”said M. Majauskas.
Peasant Valius Ąžuolas was outraged that flowers could be sold in large supermarkets, but small florists could not.
“France and other countries can guarantee non-discrimination, only Lithuania is a country where it is possible to pressure the government under the influence of some businessmen or in other ways to discriminate against small businesses and all trade goes to large networks,” he said V. Ąžuolas. He recalled that the government soon lifted the mandate. to park cars in supermarkets near supermarkets.
Edmund Pupinis compared the text of the resolution as if it were written “a grandmother who has a hard time living.”
“Nobody knows what will happen if we allow free trade,” warned Pupinis and suggested that the opposition make concrete proposals.
Eugenijus Gentvilas told conservatives that they did not see the problem itself.
“The resolution can be rejected in ways unacceptable to me or to many. Let’s look at the differences with the original resolution,” Gentville said, explaining that there was indeed a clear political commitment in the original draft, and now there are no more charges. He asked for support for resolution and concern.
The representative of the Labor Party Ieva Kačinskaitė – Urbonienė invited to show the brand to entrepreneurs, because the working group worked responsibly, took into account all the suggestions of the opposition and the position.
“Seeing that it is possible to buy a variety of products in today’s supermarkets, including more than just food, smaller entrepreneurs feel discriminated against. It seems to me that we are not saying the vibration of the air, but in principle we are saying support for various businesses , including the little ones, ”said the parliamentarian and hoped that the government’s decision on quarantine conditions would be changed.
The conservative Audrius Petrošius called for an example to be shown that the requirements must be met to reach the limit at which restrictions can be released and the work of small entrepreneurs can be restored as soon as possible.
“Even though I was shopping at the market, they won’t take me to the market today. I leave home once a week, I go straight to the store, 15-20 minutes, to eat, and I go home, I honestly follow all the requirements” said A. Petrošius and asked that decisions not be made by resolutions.
After voting in favor, 90 members of the Seimas voted in favor, 1 against and 27 abstentions.
The second resolution is more moderate
The updated resolution calls on the government to ensure safe trade and services for small businesses, and assesses the possibility for small businesses to operate in accordance with government-set quarantine requirements, thus reducing negative long-term social consequences. . The resolution drawn up by the opposition also proposes to keep Seimas informed about the measures adopted and their effectiveness.
“Confidence in managing the COVID-19 pandemic is an essential condition for correcting people’s behavior, and confidence would improve with robust, proportionate and non-discriminatory solutions,” said the resolution, emphasizing that many people in small businesses particularly limited are particularly vulnerable.
It is a slightly different resolution to the project, which was not endorsed by the Seimas; In the previous version, the Government proposed “the immediate abolition of discriminatory restrictions on small companies and markets”, He emphasized that the decisions of the government on the management of a pandemic discriminate against small entrepreneurs in relation to large chains retailers: the latter are still allowed to trade not only essential products, while small entrepreneurs selling similar products are prohibited.
The first resolution was presented by more than 20 parliamentarians, and the updated version, by 6, and the representatives of the rulers also appeared: the liberal Andrius Bagdonas, the representative of the Freedom Party Ieva Pakarklytė.
It is strictly prohibited to use the information published by DELFI on other websites, in the media or elsewhere, or to distribute our material in any way without consent, and if consent has been obtained, it is necessary to indicate DELFI as the source .
[ad_2]
