Parliament-Cabinet relationships are once again in the limelight after the Cabinet submitted its action program, followed by an exchange of rather sharp remarks and commentaries. Below People’s Deputy Serhiy Teriokhin (named Lawmaker of the Year and recipient of the Prometheus- Prestige Prize) shares his view on the situation.
S.T.: The Cabinet’s mistake is that it does no political work in Parliament. Without doubt, the Prime Minister should not make personal arrangements with every faction leader. There is a whole government machine to do this. The official in charge of the agrarian sector should come to terms with the Agrarian Committee, who is responsible for the budget with the Budget Committee, and so on. This is not happening. Instead, everything is being done using the old procedures and patterns developed by Pustovoitenko’s people, resulting in tactical agreements... or failures. Even if the Cabinet apparatus is not undermining the Premier, it is certainly no help, not now anyway. Mr. Yushchenko is engrossed in a quite deep reform of the (state) apparatus which is still to be completed and not even started in some respects. The voice of one man is the voice of no one. Moreover, he has no team, at least not in the economic field, and this is so apparent it can and should be discussed in the open. All this prevents him for moving ahead.
The Day: There is a lot of talk in the media about the Cabinet having only so much time, although everybody seems to agree that Mr. Yushchenko has an unprecedented credit of confidence.
S.T.: There are two kinds of this credit. One comes from the people and the other is political. The first one means that the Cabinet doesn’t have much time left. In fact, very little, because people have be shown leaps, not steps. To show people his usefulness, Viktor Yushchenko has to step up his work. In the political domain, far from everything is that obvious. Here we can talk about certain deadlines, but with a lot of reservations. For example, there was little love lost between Parliament and Pustovoitenko’s Cabinet. Still, he kept his post for two and a half years, because there were all petty tactical problems being solved by small groups in Parliament that could not get Mr. Pustovoitenko to resign. In theory, Yushchenko’s government could survive through the term allocated by Leonid Kuchma, regardless of the socioeconomic results of its performance, until the next elections. But that’s only theory.
The Day: How justifiable is a comparison between Viktor Yushchenko’s Cabinet and that of Russian reformer Yegor Gaidar?
S.T.: Such comparison is purely symbolic. You see, Gaidar started by tearing down the old Soviet system. Viktor Yushchenko has the advantage of building, rather than demolishing, although some tearing down will be in order, of course. Yet it won’t be as painful as it was in 1991-92. If you want to make a comparison, the Polish government would be more like it. It is formed by the Right-centrist coalition and is now very unpopular. Yet it is making very important adjustments in the Polish economy. Quite possibly, Viktor Yushchenko’s Cabinet will do a similar job in Ukraine, provided it turns sharply toward reform, not the other way.
