Last autumn the president established a goal for the new Saeima – to close the gap between Latvia and its neighbouring countries. Demand for change can be seen in election results as well, because the majority of voters cast their votes for new parties, as reported by TV3 programme Nekā personīga.
However, experts do not see much improvement in the work done by the government. On top of that, residents are growing more and more unhappy with the government’s work.
If politicians do not take the opinions of residents into account, snap elections become a possibility,
the programme reports.
The main point of criticism to Krišjānis Kariņš before the elections and during the second government’s formation was the lack of strong leadership. New Unity promised society would see a new Kariņš. Last week marked 100 days of his second government.
New Unity earned a confident victory in the 14th Saeima elections. The party received 26 seats in the Saeima. New Unity promised the New Kariņš would be able to form his new government. New Unity promised he would be more decisive. However, no notable changes have happened so far. The government was successfully composed only two months after elections.
Approval of the new state budget took even longer than that. Reform plans were postponed, but now it turns out there is no money to afford reforms. In a time when the world is going through rapid changes, Latvia’s government is showing no visions for energy, education, tax or other policies. The economic transformation listed in the government’s own declaration remains an unclear proposal at best.
Latvian Prime Minister Krišjānis Kariņš shares his opinion of the government’s work:
«I enjoy working with my colleagues in this new coalition. Most have a great amount of experience. There are many familiar faces. Every resident knows the chosen trajectory. There aren’t any major surprises planned. We approach tasks in a very practical way.
There are many big challenges ahead for healthcare and education. We have a great variety of opinions. Perhaps they are not as radically different, but they are nuanced. We will discuss, reach agreements and move forward. We have to work to improve the situation. We have identified and set ourselves a plan. We are working to progress forward.»
Providus think tank director and researcher Iveta Kažoka comments the situation in the government:
«What I see is a growing tension in the government. It can be partially explained with the approaching presidential election, as well as the fact that
the parties in the ruling coalition are in a dead end of sorts.»
Nekā personīga reminds here that the most appropriate solution to the government’s problems is the presentation of resolutions. After conflicts over the healthcare budget, Kariņš simply ordered ministries to find the necessary funding on their own in their newly-approved budgets.
University of Latvia, politologist Jānis Ikstens spoke next in the programme:
«The general impression now is that the prime minister’s work is dictated by events, not the other way around. I can see that in a situation when society is in an unsafe state and highly agitated, this is not the best way to develop the country.»
Authors of the programme explain that the prime minister’s order to find money came after doctors and teachers threatened to go on strike. Delegation of tasks is nothing bad, but in this case the prime minister should take responsibility, not pass it on to all ministries.
Since Krišjānis Kariņš has become PM four years ago, he has issued hundred and even thousands of task, or resolutions. Most of them are for everyday tasks. However, there were also those in which
the PM hoped to resolve lasting problems of state in a couple of lines of text.
In January 2020 Kariņš ordered then the Minister of Justice Jānis Bordāns to resolve the problem of lengthy court processes. The ministry respondent with a statement, listing ongoing tasks, including creation of a specialised court for economic affairs. The Justice Council announced this year, however, that court terms continue growing.
In 2018 the shared priority of all parties participating in elections was the liquidation of the mandatory procurement component (OIK). After elections, however, this entire topic disappeared from their shared agenda. When various violations involving OIK surfaced, the president criticised the government for it. Kariņš ordered then the Minister of Economics Ralfs Nemiro to create new rules to better govern OIK. Nemiro respondent by firing the state secretary for providing insufficient monitoring.
In spring 2020 a scandal surfaced over the regional passenger transportation tender, as victory went to firms associated with politicians. Kariņš respondent to that by requesting explanations as to the tender’s effect on the state budget.
LNT shut down at the end of 2019. This was a shock for Latvia’s information space. Kariņš ordered Minister of Culture Nauris Puntulis to come up with proposals to help strengthen the information space. When he received proposals, he commented that they required money, stressing that it is necessary to change the system instead. Actual work on this commenced after the start of the pandemic, when various media suffered a sharp drop in revenue.
The Ministry of Economics received countless resolutions in regards to energy-related topics, as well as topics already resolved. During the pandemic many tasks were sent to the Ministry of Health as well. When residents criticised the government for unreasonable safety regulations, vaccine procurements, insufficient protection of nursing homes, the PM said the Ministry of Economics, Ministry of Health and Ministry of Welfare are responsible, not him. The State Audit criticised this policy for lacking centralised management and coordination. During the crisis every sector and municipality were on their own.
Ikstens: «He is a person leaning towards compromises and harmonious life. He doesn’t want to engage in conflicts and happily delegates resolution of conflicts to other people.»
The politologist believes the best example of this was when Kariņš resolved the conflict involving KPV LV, National Alliance and Attīstībai/Par! in the previous government – he let them resolve it themselves even though stability of the coalition is the PM’s direct responsibility.
Kariņš’ ability to find compromises was useful in a five-party coalition. It helped approve the EU budget in 2020, when he and Angela Merkel developed a plan to calm down those who suggested taking away fund money from Hungary and Poland.
Kažoka: «Kariņš shined in these formats, and it seemed like there could be no better prime minister to lead a five or three-party coalition.»
Now the government has a majority among three similarly-minded parties. However, there are no signs of the government being more decisive than the last, says Nekā Personīga. Every week the PM is harsh in his weekly interviews, criticises the lack of reforms and the disorganised state of various sectors.
Ikstens: «It’s not something that should come from the man who has been in charge of the government for the past four years and has just started on his fifth. In the end, who better than Krišjānis Kariņš to push these reforms? Referencing Covid-19 would be out of place here, because we aren’t the only country that has experienced the pandemic. The government and various sectors of the economy have experienced Covid-19, and life didn’t stop – processes have progressed forward despite it.
I believe we see the good old Krišjānis Kariņš, who is less the head of the government, less the PM, and more a discussion moderator.»
Kažoka: «If political observers are unable to see a fundamental difference between the current and last government, unable to see any speed-up in the work of this government when compared with what we saw in previous years, more and more residents, especially groups of citizens and voters who were already unhappy with the government’s work, will see less and less improvements from now on.»
She continues: «The moment when parties that demand radical changes enter the political stage, many European values – specifically rule of law, management quality, democracy – are swept under the wave of change…»