An Address by Latvian President Valdis Zatlers at the Parliament of Latvia

Tweet

Mr Speaker, members of Parliament, ladies and gentlemen: A few months from now, the 9th Saeima will become part of the history of parliamentarianism in the Republic of Latvia. Only as time passes by will we be able to take an objective look at the process and what has been done.

At the same time, however, we can say with certainty that this is a period in time that will hold an important place in the history of Latvia since the restoration of its independence.

The last election was held in 2006, which seemed to be a year of wealth, as well as political and economic stability. From there, we moved into a deep economic and domestically political crisis. Beginning in the first year of the 9th Saeima, there was a substantial segment of society, as well as several political parties, which demanded that the Saeima be dissolved.

There were three national referenda during the term in office of this Saeima. Public opinion surveys have shown and continue to show an unprecedented lack of trust in those who are in power. Many mistakes and failures from previous years still have a negative influence on public trust in Parliament and the government. At the same time, the 9th Saeima has had to make serious decisions about stabilising the Latvian economy and undertaking obligations vis-a-vis the international lenders of the International Monetary Fund and the European Commission. I would like to take the chance, therefore, to thank those MPs who, when voting on decisive matters, managed to put aside political ambitions and party quarrels so as to act like responsible statesmen and women.

The 9th Saeima devoted a lot of attention to the economic situation and the economic crisis, but MPs have not managed to restore public trust in Latvia’s governing system. What is more, there have been decisions that have caused justifiable concerns about whether they have served the interests of the state and her people.

It is commendable that the 9th Saeima got rid of the so-called “locomotive principle” in the candidate lists of political parties, improved procedures related to party financing and campaigning, and strengthened the principle of political neutrality in the Civil Service. At the same time, however, the Saeima has occasionally taken up matters which seem to be based on lobbying on behalf of very narrow interests – the law on security institutions, mutatis mutandis, amendments to the law on lending institutions. Today, too, you have issues on your agenda that would reciprocally lead to a radical drop in the value of land that is to be privatised. I call on MPs to think carefully and to reject these draft laws, lest they vote in favour of what is called the capture of the state.

I would also like to note that after long debates, Parliament did support amendments to the Latvian Constitution to allow the people of Latvia to propose the dissolution of the Saeima.

Sadly, the Constitution still does not have an effective mechanism for addressing parliamentary crises of the type that is seen in the constitutions of other parliamentary countries. The Constitution must provide the President with the right to propose a snap election without a national referendum. Similarly, without questioning the competence of the legislature to confirm high-ranking government officials, I must say that there have been several decisions with respect to which the public did not receive proper explanations so that the decisions could have been understood. That shows that there is still a long road to go to restore public trust and strengthen the principles of democracy.

Members of Parliament, during the last year and, particularly, the last few days, the work of the Saeima has been affected by the proximity of the election. I understand that this is something which has serious effects on the process of decision making in Parliament. I also understand the great temptation to yield before short-term interests, to look good in the eyes of voters, and to win points by criticising others instead of making and defending your own offers. I understand all of this, but I must warn you that your decisions can have seriously negative consequences. Please remember that what you do in the Saeima is being watched by people both in Latvia and abroad.
The things that you do today and tomorrow may affect the future of the state for years and even decades. I call on you to think and act on behalf of the long-term interests of the state.

Many experts have pointed to Latvia as an example of a country which has successfully made its way out of the crisis, mobilised itself, and taken difficult, but necessary decisions. And yet there is still the risk that we might mess everything up once again. The situation that existed in late 2008 and early 2009 may return. Latvia’s budget deficit remains high. We must learn to spend as much as we can earn.

We have to do our homework on behalf of the interests of the people of Latvia and not our international lenders. It is mistaken to justify steps take to stabilise the economy exclusively by pointing to the demands of international lenders. That is what representatives of the legislative and the executive branch of government have sometimes tended to do when they lack self-confidence, courage and competence in defending their own position. We are not implementing the programme of economic stabilisation and growth only because someone has ordered us to do so. We are doing it to fix the mistakes that we have made ourselves and to balance revenues and expenditures.

We are successfully treating the disease that we call an economic crisis. The fact that the fever has been broken, however, does not mean that the treatment can end. We must ensure full recovery for the national economy.

During this campaign season, we have heard a lot about what parties will not do, about their “lines in the sand.” We are not hearing enough about what they plan to do. I call on all MPs who are standing for re-election to provide voters with a competent, content-based and justified offer. Compete over the best vision for long-term economic development.

Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to take this opportunity to talk about individual tasks or challenges which I consider to be of fundamental importance if Latvia is to develop as a country with good governance and economic success. I have spoken about these things before, but I think that during a campaign season, it is important to repeat them here in the Saeima.

First of all, we must create prerequisites for the Latvian state’s future – the next generation of the people of Latvia. Demographic processes are very seriously threatening the long term future of the state and her people. The birth rate and massive emigration have not led to generational replacement. The demographic situation has a serious effect on the sustainability of our social security system and our pension system. Nowhere in Europe are there as many single mothers, proportionally, as in Latvia. There are more parents who avoid paying child support each year than there are babies who are born. What’s more, most of the children who live in children’s homes in our country have parents who are alive and capable of work.

Subsidies for young mothers will not be enough to deal with this situation. We require fundamental changes in our country’s social policies. We need a considered strategy for the development of rural areas to keep people from leaving the country and creating conditions which lead those who have already left to want to come home and put their experience and knowledge to use. That is the first requirement.

You may ask how this is to be done. We don’t need to reinvent the bicycle. Scandinavian countries and Ireland have shown that targeted and long-term national policies can achieve exactly that.

The first big job for the next 20 years will be to ensure that families in Latvia are willing and able to raise two or more children. Children must have high-quality education. People in cities and the countryside must be able to find themselves appropriate jobs, and the people of Latvia must not abandon their country. My dear politicians, what exactly is the offer that your party can make to achieve this? We are beyond the stage of slogans and declarations. We need concrete plans for action.

Second, we must become able to govern our country in a sensible way. This does not mean changing the system of governance or the election system, nor does it mean shifting from a parliamentary democracy to a presidential country. Changes in form will not achieve anything on their own. What is needed is fundamental changes in the content of these processes. There have been suggestions about changing the elections system, but I don’t think that’s where the problem lies. The British have used a first-past-the-post system for centuries and are now talking about transferring to a proportional system. There has been praise for the right of our voters to amend candidate lists offered by parties with pluses and minuses. In many countries, voters have no such right.

As far as I am concerned, Latvia does not need to change its election system, but there should be changes to make the election system truly proportional. That would mean creating a larger number of smaller election districts than is the case right now. It would also mean creating a voter register for all elections.

I think that it is possible to ensure qualitative changes in the existing system of governance by improving the basic law with amendments that are in line with the spirit of our time. In order to ensure that competent and politically neutral professionals are appointed to senior state positions without unnecessary politicisation, I support an expansion in the rights of the President in terms of nominating and approving politically independent state officials. I refer to the Ombudsman, justices of the Constitutional Court, the National Auditor, and the president of the Bank of Latvia.

I have also expressed my support for the idea of a nationally elected president in Latvia. I believe that that would balance out and improve the partnership and responsibilities of the different branches of government. It would also promote civic involvement and responsibility for important aspects of the country’s political life.

After the 10th Saeima election, there will have to be serious analysis of whether the changes that have been implemented in regulations related to campaigning and elections are sufficient to ensure the expression of voter will in line with the highest standards of democracy. I want voters to have a chance to express support on election day for specific positions. I want them to authorise future representatives of the people to pursue those positions. I call on political parties to speak about these issues in their campaign programmes and in public debates.

Members of Parliament, when I stood before you a year ago I said that we have governed our country poorly. We have made many mistakes. Sometimes we have lacked political will and economic far-sightedness. We have succeeded in reinstating the institutions of the nation state, but it has so happened that we have lost the people’s trust therein. We have sometimes lacked competence and professionalism. Far more often, we have lacked unselfishness and morals.

Our government institutions must work more effectively. In a global economy, Latvia must compete with other countries in terms of indicators related to effective national governance, too. That is why we need professional, well-educated and politically neutral civil servants to strike a balance in the taking of political decisions by offering a competent and professional approach. We need civil servants who make sure that decisions taken in government are in line with the state’s interests, the quality of those interests, and the succession of those interests.

The people of Latvia must be far more active in the governance of their country. That is not just the people’s right, it is also a duty. Only a civically educated individual can take the responsibility of making active decisions about issues that are important to the individual and to the people. That is the most important difference between a citizen and a local resident who has not been integrated into the local society and does not take part in its political processes.

Ladies and gentlemen, please let me repeat myself. The big gain of 20 years of freedom has been the nation state, but the survival of Latvia as a nation state will be possible only if we learn to govern it sensibly.

Third, sensible governance is not possible without the ability to work together. That applies both to the political environment and to the public at large. We have tried to consolidate and bring together different social and ethnic groups, but there is still age discrimination in the labour market, and there is still distinct income inequality. People are still dividing society up between those who speak Latvian and those who speak Russian. This ethnic approach, sadly enough, is also still seen in the positions which political parties take. Parties must formulate their ideological identity, not their ethnic belonging to groups in the electorate.

We still do not have a unified understanding that those residents of Latvia whose native language is not Latvian are our compatriots and will be our compatriots. We need these people. Residents of Latvia of other nationalities, in turn, must understand their belonging to the Latvian state and the state language. There are too few of us to afford splits and separations. That’s why I welcome the process of consolidation among political parties.
Greater co-operation and support is our strength. We must learn that.

The fourth challenge is to ensure the successful development of our country’s economy. Otherwise, the state will not ensure a high-quality social system, and it will not ensure functions in the areas of education and health care. For that reason, members of Parliament, I want to talk to you about the concrete decisions that politicians are going to have to take immediately after the 10th Saeima election. As the election approaches, we are increasingly hearing claims that we do not need the international loan programme. We must be very careful when we hear such irresponsible evaluations of the situation. Despite the positive trend of economic recovery that we are seeing, forecasts may prove to be false or exaggerated.

In the name of succession in economic decisions and economic stability, we must continue to implement structural reforms in the system of national governance, we must continue to cut budget spending, we must improve our export capacities, we must restructure taxes, and we must do other things to stabilise the economy.

It is hard for the state to offer a believable promise to companies and investors that the tax burden will not be increased if the budget still has a major deficit. A high budget deficit inevitably becomes a reason for decisions to raise taxes to cover the deficit. The Cabinet of Ministers must work to prepare the national budget for the next Saeima as much as possible. I do not, however, support the idea that any deadlines should be implemented in the law in terms of when the outgoing government has to submit a draft budget to the Saeima, knowing perfectly clearly that it will be reworked and amended by a different government – the one that will be approved by the new Saeima.

Ladies and gentlemen, when I engaged in conversations at the Rīga Castle last week with representatives of the political forces that are in the Saeima, people insisted on the need to change the tax structure. What went missing, however, was specificity – a detailed proposal and a plan of steps that are to be taken.

There is no question that tax policy is a fundamental element in economic development. Tax policy must promote the emergence of new jobs and the attraction of investments. The most important thing, however, is that tax policies must be predictable, because that is one of the most effective weapons in the battle against the shadow economy. I believe that when political parties make proposals on how to improve tax policies, they must offer well-argued answers to questions about dividing the tax burden, observing the principles of social justice, shrinking the shadow economy, and promoting employment.

Dear MPs, these are issues for the 10th Saeima. These are also, however, questions to which voters will want to find answers in the campaign programmes of political parties. These answers must be clear and understandable so that when voters go to the ballot box, they can indicate their evaluation of what is on offer.

For that reason, I would also like to take this opportunity to talk to voters. Let’s demand that politicians give us businesslike and concrete answers to essential questions. Let’s not allow ourselves to be influenced by noisy shows and effective advertising. Let us be wise in our votes, because the destiny of our Latvia is in our hands. This election and the composition of the 10th Saeima will be a measuring stick for evaluating our responsibility and our civic maturity.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am often asked to name Latvia’s goal. Again and again I repeat the same thing: Our goal is a sensibly governed, green, creative and internationally active nation state in which there is a demographically rejuvenated, civically responsible and consolidated Latvian nation. I am sure that we can achieve this goal.

Dear MPs, I am sure that each of you entered the Saeima with great ambitions and good intentions to work on behalf of your nation. Your destiny was to serve during a difficult era, one that has been full of challenges. I would like to thank all MPs, the chairpersons of the Saeima’s committees, and particularly the speaker, Mr Daudze, and the Presidium for their co-operation and understanding when it comes to issues that are of key importance to the Latvian state.

Leave a comment

Name (required)

E-mail (required)

URI

Your Message