Sally Benfeld
Party politicians are already starting to meet with voters, and the closer the election day comes, the more often you can ask them a question not only in person, but also on social networks.
Of course, not everyone is interested in the same thing, however, in my opinion, there are some questions that should be answered by all parties that will run for the 14th Saeima, and it would be wise if every voter asked them. Some of the questions refer to the so-called ideological field, but common to both economic and ideological questions is that they all require and will require a lot of money.
The first question, in my opinion, for the parties is how to strengthen Latvia’s defense capabilities. With military service or by expanding and developing the National Guard? Can Latvia afford such large investments, and what exactly will they be in the case of one or the other solution? It is clear, however, that Latvia cannot and is unable to maintain, for example, a 50,000-strong professional army, both because of the costs and because various industries would be deprived of manpower. Also, NATO members can hardly afford to maintain such an army in Latvia (and Estonia, Lithuania and Poland also need it), moreover, it should be reminded that there is no such one NATO army, but there are armies of the member states. The war in Ukraine has also shown that it is necessary to know how to operate modern weapons and that training even non-rookie soldiers takes time. The answers to some of the questions that have already been asked publicly can be found on the website of the Ministry of Defense, but there are still a number of unanswered questions. In other words, will those young people who are citizens of Latvia, but who have never lived here, who may not even know the Latvian language, need to serve in Latvia? Will those studying abroad also have to go to this service when they leave their studies? And if they join the National Guard, will the Latvian state pay their travel expenses for traveling to the National Guard training? Finally, will Latvian citizens who have served or are active in organizations similar to the National Guard in their home countries also have to join this service in Latvia?
The second issue is about the removal of memorials to the Soviet army in places where there are no burials and the renaming of streets. Do we need to change all street names that have Russian nationalities or surnames of people who once lived in the USSR/Russia? Is it necessary to change Pushkin, Lermontov, etc.? names? On the other hand, if we use, for example, Pushkin’s name in street names, shouldn’t we also dedicate a street or a square to the talented people of other countries and nations? About the monster in Riga, it is already known who was for and who was against its removal, you just have to look at the vote on the website of the Saeima.
The third question would be about the use of so-called energetic peat. First of all, an honest answer should be given as to how much and for what amounts it is used in energy and how much in agriculture. Will its ban also mean a ban on its use in agriculture? And finally, has it been calculated how much ecological damage the use of peat bogs has brought to Latvia so far. Can they really not be replaced by anything else until the ban? We can argue about the causes of climate change, but it is clear that the slow destruction of peat bogs is actually changing the environment and ecology, even if we don’t immediately notice it.
The fourth question is, of course, related to the energy crisis and rising prices of energy resources, and support to the population. I have no doubt that parties will have all kinds of ideas and offers, sometimes quite glamorous, but you should know how much it will require from the budget. The main thing is where to get this money? Until now, the attitude of us, the residents, has been quite peculiar: on the one hand, we demand more support, on the other hand, we blame the government for borrowing. Therefore, plans for the supports that will undoubtedly be needed must be very specific and clear, without miracles.
Of course, the question about money also applies to the first three, and of course there will still be questions about pensions, taxes, other benefits, access to health care, etc. They will probably also be asked about reducing VAT, but I doubt whether the parties will want and know how to simply and to answer this question honestly, because in reality a full and comprehensive answer is difficult. Perhaps it is more reasonable to assume that this tax reduction will create a hole in the budget (and it will) and, for example, will improve the purchasing power of only a part of society for a while. For the wealthiest, for example, slightly cheaper bread will not change anything. I think these four questions are important for all citizens, even regardless of their wallet, because public loan payments still affect everyone, so at least these four questions should be asked when meeting with politicians.
–
