MP Viktors Valainis: The coalition follows the opposition's proposals with some delay

Jealousy, or at least pretending to be jealous, is a frequent phenomenon in Latvian politics. It is often heard from the opposition that the coalition rejects its proposals only to later adopt the opposition's idea as if it were its own and thus grow its political capital. A similar situation has developed around the proposal of the Union of Greens and Farmers (Zaļo un Zemnieku Savienība, ZZS), which was rejected by the coalition on Thursday, which proposed for the payment of a one-time benefit of 200 euros to seniors and persons with disabilities.

"We have already agreed on the amount in the coalition, we have agreed on the type of support. And the Latvian Pensioners Federation and all the federations involved, including the Latvian Association of Local and Regional Governments, have agreed on our plan. Consequently, support will be provided and I urge not to support this bill because we are already very close to making a decision and will return to the Saeima with a ready-made decision, which will have to be voted on by colleagues,” explaining that the coalition, which has been talking about paying benefits to seniors since at least February 16, will have reached the decision sooner than it would be possible with the proposal submitted by the ZZS, said Māris Možvillo, Chairman of the KPV LV Saeima faction.

Viktors Valainis, representing ZZS, who started collecting signatures for the now-rejected bill on the afternoon of February 17, believes that this is one of the cases when the coalition wants to appropriate the laurels deserved by the opposition.

Why did the ZZS submit this proposal, if it is known that the coalition has already practically agreed to grant benefits to seniors?

We submitted it before the coalition had agreed on anything. That was shortly after we also submitted a proposal for a benefit of EUR 500 for each child, which the government then submitted as its own.

For the senior proposal, it was a logical decision. We, like many other parties, cooperate with the Latvian Pensioners Federation. We met, discussed the issues and prepared our draft law.

So does the opposition believe that the coalition is using its ideas and suggestions to increase its popularity?

In my opinion, the coalition is following the opposition's proposals with some delay. It cannot perceive the whole problem field together. We communicate with all groups in society, we have that information and we act, as opposed to them.

Our actions are putting pressure on the coalition to consider these issues, as it has been with other issues when the coalition reacts to our proposals a few weeks later.

Throughout the crisis, the coalition has approved all opposition proposals on support for the population after some delay, but the delay is so great that support mechanisms no longer help as much as they would if they had been adopted earlier.

Seniors need medicine now, if it is not bought now, the disease will spread and they will need more money for treatment. The coalition only responds in a timely manner when the question is about supporting corporations, for example by paying hundreds of millions to airBaltic.

There is an opinion that pensioners are hardly affected by the crisis and it is pointless to pay them benefits. What would you say to those who express this view?

This is very short-sighted thinking. The problem is, indeed, the pensioners retain their income, but health care is a very serious issue for them. If health care services are not available for a long time, this leads to seniors doing the treatment at home, which incurs additional costs. These expenses are not added to the pension, and they are very high in the field of health care.

If a person is not treated for a heart problem or dislocated ankle, they must take medicine, which is very expensive. It is a side effect of Covid that is also talked about by doctors.

The management of the Bank of Latvia is already warning that we are rapidly approaching a too high level of a budget deficit. Shouldn't we slow down with the payment of various benefits?

I think that the Bank of Latvia is not consistent in its statements, one day it says that additional support is needed, the other - guys, now it's too much.

It is necessary to make logical decisions for economic recovery. When providing benefits, the government works in only one direction - imposing restrictions and issuing benefits. There is a lack of direction for economic development, which is the joint responsibility of the Ministry of Finance, the Prime Minister and the entire government.

We see what is happening with the transit business, we see the restrictions of companies driven into the shadow economy. For example, many people visit hairdressers in homes and apartments, but these actions are not taxed.

Also, amendments to special tax regimes made during the crisis. They adversely affect the ability of businesses to operate normally in times of crisis, which is the main reason why the situation is so bad.

*****

Be the first to read interesting news from Latvia and the world by joining our Telegram and Signal channels.