The current ruling parties demonstrate a remarkable ability to quarrel not over important issues for the country and society, but over... secondary ones.
Recently, we witnessed a fierce confrontation over the Istanbul Convention - the government was practically hanging by a thread, but then the seasoned politicians of 'New Unity', with the help of the president, managed to 'calm down' both part of the right opposition and their partners in the form of the Union of Greens and Farmers. And just days ago, a new earthquake occurred in the government - this time due to a proposal from the same 'rebels' - the 'green farmers', who suggested to 'reorganize' the Society Integration Fund (SIF), saving, according to the calculations of the 'green farmers', almost 2 million euros.
Close it down and that's it!
Although the politicians used the word 'reorganization', it was clear to everyone that it was actually about liquidating the SIF, as the 'green farmers' proposed to redistribute its functions among three ministries, thereby taking away both budget allocations and the funds from the EU funds that the SIF operates with.
One can only guess what the main goal of the 'green farmers' was - to try to raise their significantly decreased rating by attacking an unpopular and incomprehensible agency, to torpedo the 'tired' government, or simply to use this proposal for bargaining - for example, regarding other budget items important to the 'green farmers'.
Revenge or just cold calculation?
In any case, the 'green farmers' chose the right 'direction of attack'. Firstly, everyone is talking about the need to somehow reform or even conduct a review of the entire integration policy - both the social partners of the government (the Employers' Confederation harshly criticized the SIF) and the researchers from 'Providus', who noted serious shortcomings in the integration policy, including in relation to Ukrainian refugees, as well as the entire parliamentary opposition...
Secondly, the SIF is also responsible for allocating funding (grants) to non-governmental organizations, many of which recently very actively opposed the bill on withdrawal from the Istanbul Convention. In other words, both the 'green farmers' and other supporters of withdrawing from this convention have a grievance against the SIF and those they financially support.
Thirdly, many of the SIF's programs are indeed very opaque, and the results are questionable, as pointed out by the State Audit Office during a recent audit of the Fund.
Most importantly, the 'green farmers' knew that if this proposal for the actual liquidation of the SIF reached a vote, it would be accepted, as the entire opposition would be ready to support it, including with the aim of rocking the government boat again.
The partners of the 'green farmers' in the government understood this perfectly. They could not allow a 'crackdown' on the SIF, otherwise it would turn out that they had de facto betrayed those public activists who had been so actively and even zealously opposing the bill on withdrawal from the convention in recent weeks.
If we abstract from emotions and political games, and look at the essence of the matter, then many of the claims of both the 'green farmers' and the opposition against the SIF and the implementation of integration policy are justified.
Why do we need this Fund?!
This year, 711 thousand euros were spent just on the maintenance of the SIF's apparatus (excluding administrative expenses), and next year, 693 thousand were planned.
There are not many staff members, but their average salary is also quite high - 3,100 euros. At the same time, the SIF attracts a significant number of freelance consultants for project administration. The total budget of the SIF approaches 40 million.
Complete chaos reigns
During a recent discussion on the program 'Kas notiek Latvijā?' on Latvian TV, it became clear that there is complete chaos in the reports on the activities of the SIF. It is completely unclear how many Latvian language courses were conducted and for how many of the same non-citizens, and how much money was spent on this.
The head of the Employers' Confederation, Kaspars Gorkšs, referred in the same broadcast to explanations from the Ministry of Finance, which indicated that 53 people underwent Latvian language training, and if you divide the total amount, it turns out that more than 70 thousand euros were allegedly spent on training one person, which sounds just outrageous. However, later the SIF stated that this was incorrect data.
In any case, 'something is not right in the conservatory', and it has indeed long been necessary to address the effectiveness and feasibility of the existence of the Society Integration Fund.
However... 'the miracle did not happen' - at the last meeting of the coalition council, 'New Unity' and the 'Progressives' again managed (as in the case of the Istanbul Convention) to persuade the 'green farmers' to go 'for a compromise', that is, to give up their positions - the 'green farmers' ultimately abandoned their proposal to liquidate the SIF, in exchange for a promise to conduct a functional audit of the SIF next year.
It is obvious to everyone how this will all end - the audit will clearly drag on until the elections, and by then a new Saeima and government will come to power, and everyone will not care about the fate of such a small office. And although the 'green farmers' assure that they did not arrange any bargaining on this issue, according to their partners' admission, the 'green farmers' should be satisfied with the result - a whole series of their budget proposals will ultimately be supported, including in the field of healthcare. Let us remind you that the budget will be adopted by the Saeima in its second (final) reading in early December.
Untouchables and unsinkable
How voters will assess such somersaults of the 'green farmers' will be known relatively soon: elections to the Saeima will take place in early October next year. But today it is clear that no reorganizations, liquidations, or even reforms in public administration are to be expected! There will only be some insignificant, cosmetic changes. No one will allow any encroachment on a significant part of the electorate - the bureaucracy!
