This post was originally published on here
At first glance, it may appear that due to disagreements between two coalition partners — Progresīvie (The Progressives) and Zaļo un Zemnieku savienība (Union of Greens and Farmers, ZZS) — the days of Evika Siliņa’s government are numbered. However, as Filips Rajevskis, co-owner of the company “Mediju tilts” and political scientist, emphasizes in a conversation with BNN, the government is very stable.
“In public statements, boundaries are clearly defined. ZZS has clearly stated that if their ministers are touched, the government will fall. That is a very direct and unambiguous decision. At the same time, The Progressives, through their actions, demonstrate very precisely that they are afraid of the government collapsing. As we can see in the timber industry scandal, The Progressives are not speaking at all about political responsibility or anything that could affect government stability; instead, they are talking about disciplinary proceedings against civil servants. They show that they are deeply concerned about government stability, because otherwise The Progressives would lose their positions of power. However, given that Evika Siliņa has to some extent sided with ZZS, they are attempting to influence the Prime Minister through a direct attack on the Head of the State Chancellery,” the political scientist explains.
According to him, the demand for disciplinary proceedings against the Head of the State Chancellery is a direct and unequivocal attack on Siliņa, because if Raivis Kronbergs is removed, it would significantly weaken her position and influence as Prime Minister.
Responding to BNN’s remark that even if the timber industry scandal had not existed, given the confrontation between The Progressives and ZZS it might have been in their interest to invent such a scandal, Rajevskis says that one can already see how strongly they — especially the head of the party’s Saeima faction — have latched onto it and keep repeating the figure of 50 million.
“In reality, it is empty talk, because no action follows from their side, and The Progressives very openly and directly demonstrate that none will follow. Their ministers are quiet as mice, vote together with the entire government, remain timidly silent, and in no way even attempt to demonstrate The Progressives’ overall position during Cabinet meetings.”
Asked whether, given this behavior by The Progressives and assuming they enter the next Saeima, other political forces would again be willing to form a coalition with them, Rajevskis admits that with a certain irony he observes that once again, eight months before elections, there are politicians who loudly proclaim in the media with foam at the mouth with whom they will never, ever form a coalition.
“Looking at this, I would advise voters to remember what promises were made just as passionately before the previous elections, how those promises were broken, and how the government was assembled despite those ‘never, ever’ pledges from both Jaunā Vienotība and The Progressives. To predict now who will go to bed with whom in a coalition would be highly unprofessional,” the political scientist says.
Asked whether, given their left-leaning orientation, The Progressives should not be demanding decisions on cheaper food, lower electricity prices, and other state support measures in the social sphere, Rajevskis replies that, as coalition partners, they simply cannot do so.
“That would mean touching the budget, and we all remember very well how the budget was adopted in December — with how much pain and difficulty. The last thing anyone wants is for the budget to be reopened. If they began to push their verbally expressed left-wing agenda in a political way, they would quickly be put in their place, and just like in the timber industry scandal, The Progressives’ ministers would quietly and calmly support the government’s position,” Filips Rajevskis explains.
