| Anchor – Evgeni Kiselev
Anchor: Last Saturday the leaders of Yabloko announced
that they would try to force the resignation of the government.
For reference, under the Russian Constitution the State Duma may
pass a vote of no-confidence in the Cabinet by a simple majority
of 226 votes. By the way, the State Duma has never achieved this
goal. At list 20% of the deputies, in other words at least 90
votes, are required for a no-confidence motion. Yabloko has 17
seats in the Duma. What are they counting on?
Today we have a live discussion with the Chairman of
the Yabloko faction Grigory
Yavlinsky. Grigory Alexeyevich, what are you going to do?
Where will you get the missing votes?
Yavlinsky: Happy Easter, Evgeni Alexeyevich.
Anchor: Happy Easter to you.
Yavlinsky: Today is a special day. As you may
have noticed of late, virtually all the factions in the State
Duma have explicitly criticized the government, even Unity. Even
the leaders of Unity, which include the Minister of the Interior,
criticized their government, not to speak about other factions.
We propose that a review of the government's performance over
the past three years be put on the agenda. I would like to add
something to your introduction: another circumstance needs to
be considered. This government has now been in office for three
years. The President still hasn't issued his Address, developments
in the country and people’s general feelings about developments
are negative, as the government should fully understand - look
at the situation with crime, schools burning down, fires are breaking
out: already forest fires have begun. The government is making
a series of decisions distant from people's interests that they
are finding hard to identify with. And in general the government
is demonstrating total indifference to developments in the country
which it is supposed to govern.
We feel that the time has come - and this is not only our opinion,
we made this decision not only on the basis of our own ideas,
but also to a large extent at the request of 35 regions represented
in the Yabloko bureau, its governing body: they all insisted that
the time had come to raise some hard questions with the government:
why is it so impotent? Why isn't it addressing strategic issues?
How long will the internal bickering in the government continue?
Why is it expressing such indifference to developments in the
country? This is the range of issues that I believe many deputies
would like to ask. I don't think it will be much of a problem
to put on the Duma agenda a question on the government’s
performance.
Kiselev: But Gennady Zyuganov, for example, has
suggested that a vote of no-confidence should only be proposed
if one is convinced that such a vote will achieve a definite result.
And the no-confidence vote does gain the backing of the majority
and does not even gain the backing of the 90 votes required to
put the issue on the agenda, there is no point in starting the
procedure.
Yavlinsky: Well this is his view:
Anchor: Do you disagree?
Yavlinsky: Let us leave to Zyuganov's conscience
what he is going to do about it. But we believe that this is a
coherent assessment of the government's performance. We have tried
for a long time to persuade the government on economic reforms,
for example, regarding taxes, small and medium business, reforms
of the housing and utilities sector and RAO UES.
But the government is absolutely unreasonable, it is pushing
through decisions that can hardly be described as competent. And
besides, let me stress again that the approach to strategic issues
is unprofessional. Therefore we believe it is important to assess
the government's performance and this is a procedure that conforms
with the laws and the Constitution. But I would like to add something.
The question of the resignation of the government is not only
about 226 votes in the State Duma. It is perhaps the question
about a single person who can alone decide the fate of his own
government.
Kiselev: But that does not require a no-confidence
vote by the State Duma.
Yavlinsky: True, but it is very important to
discuss the performance of the government. This is not a personal
question. It is my question to Kasyanov, or Kudrin, or Gref, or
to the Defense Minister who has again refused to implement military
reforms, or to the Interior Minister who is not only unable to
secure the lives of the deputies, but does not even see fit to
express his condolences on behalf of the government. And then
what happens at the Duma when the government comes there to report
and explain its position on the issue - this is very much like
a farce.
In other words, these are not questions to individual members
of the government and this is not about personal relations. It
is a totally different question. The question is much broader:
what does the government plan to do in Russia? And it would be
worth debating this issue on the eve of the President's annual
Address.
Kiselev: But you are being criticized. It has been
suggested that given the number of votes held by Yabloko you could
just as well declare war on England every morning, to no avail.
And it has been said that your initiative is merely electioneering.
Do you think these accusations make no sense?
Yavlinsky: Hmm... Well, I think the government
should always defend itself. It defends itself as best it can.
As for an electioneering move, politics is my whole life, and
this is a dialogue with the constituency. To me it is very important
-
Kiselev: So, you wouldn't deny that by addressing
your critical remarks to the government and even perhaps raising
a motion of no-confidence, you expect to attract some of the protest
vote?
Yavlinsky: I would make two points. Forcing
the government to resign is not the programmatic goal of Yabloko.
We do not believe that the resignation of the government is the
policy goal of our election campaign. We simply look at the attitude
of the government to developments in the country, are outraged
and disagree.
Kiselev: Would you be prepared to join the new government
if the present government were to resign?
Yavlinsky: Yes, we would be prepared to consider
that issue, as we believe that the country is facing major challenges.
The number of seats we have in the Duma does not permit us to
form the whole government, but we would certainly be prepared
to take part in the government to resolve the most serious tasks,
the long-term tasks. As for electioneering -
Kiselev: So you are saying that members of Yabloko
faction would agree to take some ministerial portfolios?
Yavlinsky: We have said this on many occasions
and are ready to say so again.
Kiselev: But the situation changes. I am asking
you about the present situation?
Yavlinsky: Yes, you are quite right. All the
political forces are political forces precisely because they are
- if they are serious - ready to assume responsibility for the
resolution of some of the key tasks.
Kiselev: And you personally?
Yavlinsky: Including myself.
Kiselev: So you would accept the post of deputy
prime minister?
Yavlinsky: I would discuss the issue with the
person who offers it to me. It would probably be the President.
Kiselev: Did you have any preliminary consultations
on this topic?
Yavlinsky: No, I have not discussed this issue
with the President.
Kiselev: Have you discussed it with anyone?
Yavlinsky: I have not discussed it with anyone
other than members of our party, of our bureau.
Kiselev: But recently - as you mentioned yourself
- the leaders of United Russia Party at their congress launched
a devastating attack on the government and its chairman Mikhail
Kasyanov. And perhaps you are calculating that if it comes to
debating your proposal, United Russia will backtrack, will fail
to be consistent and in this way you could claim that they are
being disingenuous? Is this perhaps your plan?
Yavlinsky: Everything is simple. Either they
back the proposal to hear the government's report on its work
or they do not back it and then for a while they won't be able
to pretend to be criticizing the government. That applies to other
factions as well.
Kiselev: The communists as well?
Yavlinsky: The communists and all the rest.
Kiselev: So, you are likely to gain from this situation,
whatever happens?
Yavlinsky: I just wanted to say that we do
not treat it as a game. It is indeed a serious question for us,
for you and the whole country. It is not a question of winning
or losing a game. We have no hidden agenda.
Kiselev: But you do go into politics, don't you?
Yavlinsky: Yes, but it is politics...
Kiselev: I do not say that politics is a game but
in politics you can win and lose points.
Yavlinsky: Yes, in politics it is better not
to make mistakes. For instance, I regret discussing this question
on the eve of Easter. This may have been a mistake on our part
- to hold party functions on such days. That is true. However,
I have no doubts whatsoever on the content. Today we are in a
situation when the government does not account for its accounts
on any issues before the State Duma or the nation – indeed
it doesn’t report to anybody. It is neither through the
Defense Ministry, nor the Interior Ministry, nor the Foreign Ministry
- and I would like to say that far from everything is good in
regard to this bloc.
Kiselev: Hang on a minute, Grigory Alexeyevich,
aren’t you being dishonest here? The Foreign Ministry, the
Interior Ministry, the Defense Ministry, a number of other ministries
and departments - these are entities with an asterisk, which is
to say that they are indicated as ministries de facto reporting
directly to the President.
Yavlinsky: I am not being insincere. There
is no insincerity here. In form...
Kiselev: Can you ask Kasyanov or the government
to account for the work of these organizations...
Yavlinsky: Wait a minute. I am fed up with
this senselessness. It is impossible to ask an account from the
main ministers. The prime minister is our "semi-principal"
economist, a "semi-principal" accountant. Where is the
government that you can call to account? Where is the government
that you can recommend something to? Where is the government with
whom one may pursue a dialogue? Where is the government which
you can even help? This arrangement leads to complete irresponsibility
and total inability to do anything. This is what you and I observe
today. The main feature of the government is its full inability
to resolve at least some issues and to move in some direction.
Kiselev: Wait a minute, let us talk about the military
reform. This is what you said. Or say, crime control. But this
is an area that Gryzlov is responsible for, if you take the war
against crime, the man is appointed by the President and is answerable
to him. That means that the system must probably be changed. How
can one expect Kasyanov to be responsible for some failures if
Gryzlov has failures in the work of the Interior Ministry?
Yavlinsky: It is not the right time to raise
the question of changing the system. In my opinion the prime minister
alone is responsible, as stated in the Constitution. I prefer
to act by law and by Constitution. By law and by Constitution,
all these ministers are members of the government of the Russian Federation. It doesn’t matter how the posts
are distributed. Let Kasyanov go to the President and ask the
President how he should act, when they raise the issue with him
that all decisions have come to a halt in army reform, military
reform - and this is a very serious matter. The army is not being
reduced: the army is not becoming professional. They invented
some six-month service, but it is now clear that all this is absurd
at a time when the question of a professional army has simply
been brushed aside. This is no longer a question of desire or
reluctance.
In the Interior Ministry the minister himself raises the question
of complete corruption, of the connections of an immense number
of Interior Ministry officials with organized crime, but the question
is not raised anywhere, is not examined anywhere and it is impossible
to ask anyone to account for this situation. Finally the government
is working as it is today, as it is totally unaccountable. And
that is why I would like - speaking in the State Duma - to ask
our colleagues whether we will discuss the government at all?
Indeed, elections are coming soon and it is right that there should
be elections, so let us discuss the question of resignation, and
not actual resignation - that is the next question, but let us
first at least ask the government, let us pose quite intelligible
questions: what is happening to the operational management of
the economy? In this country in winter apartments get frozen,
we have forest fires in summer and in spring. Who do we ask about
this and who do we discuss these things with?
Kiselev: Tell me whether I understood you correctly
or not: as I understand you want to raise this issue at a minor
level: you are not seeking immediately the dismissal of the cabinet,
you are not actually seeking an immediate of non-confidence: rather
you simply want to hear the government account for its actions?
And only then...
Yavlinsky: There is no such possibility and
we are not going to raise this question as one of our colleagues
says, softly: this is tough action. We are going to raise the
question clearly and coherently. We will collect 90 signatures,
we will table the motion of non-confidence, we will require a
report from the government: we will demand discussion of this
issue. This is our position.
Kiselev: Well, good, and the President is responsible
for the government’s failures?
Yavlinsky: President is fully responsible.
Kiselev: Don’t you see that by raising the
question in this way, using the wording you have mentioned, you
are missing aim and concentrating all your attention on the Kasyanov
Cabinet?
Yavlinsky: No, I have phrased question in this
way as these individuals are authorized by the Constitution and
by law to be accountable for these questions. They are obligated
to answer these questions. They have been appointed by the President,
the President is responsible for the government that he established
in the country. The State Duma is obligated to ask the government
to account for its actions. It will only be possible after this
step to meet with the President and coherently repeat our position..
For instance, we will reiterate our view to the President.
Kiselev: This is probably the last question, the
one we began with: - will you collect 90 signatures?
Yavlinsky: I don’t think this will be
a big problem. It seems to me that there are a sufficient number
of people in the State Duma who are prepared to seriously discuss
not only individual amendments, not only individual laws, but
are prepared to discuss the problem as a whole.
Kiselev: And technically, in terms of deadlines,
when can this take place?
Yavlinsky: We will begin collecting signatures
immediately after the State Duma resumes work, which will be as
the 12th and I think that before the end of May we gain a clear
answer regarding the support enjoyed by the government in the
State Duma, the factions supporting the policy pursued by the
government or the lack of such a policy, any policy, as I would
formulate it, and those prepared to discuss and raise the question
of no-confidence in the government.
Kiselev: Thank you, Grigory Alexeyevich, for your
answers. In the Itogi studio our guest was Grigory Yavlinsky,
leader of Yabloko, who on Saturday announced his intention to
push a vote of no-confidence in the government.
| 