| Moskovsky Komsomolets interviewed prominent Russian
parliament members about their attitude to the "principle of
one-party rule": It should be noted that representatives of
the parties with the best chances of winning the elections are more
favourable to the idea than their colleagues from the Duma "minority".
Communists will not oust everyone.
Ivan Melnikov, deputy chairman of the Central Committee of the
CPRF:
We have always supported this idea. In our view the presidential
proxies should be abruptly curtailed. The government should have
the real power. Thus we prefer a parliamentary republic, where
a parliamentary majority appoints the prime minister and cabinet.
However, at first we would accept the following procedures: parliament
appoints only the head of government and key ministers: a list
of the ministers could be drawn up in advance. And it should be
up to the elected prime minister and President of Russia to distribute
all other ministerial posts.
Q: How would you distribute cabinet posts between
your party colleagues?
Melnikov: The main criterion is professionalism
and a possibility of working in the interests of the country,
rather than party enrollment. If we are talking about a possible
prime minister, I can name you two of the most suitable candidates:
Yuri Maslukov and Sergei Glazeyev. Alexander Zhukov, present chairman
of the Duma budget committee could head the financial-economic
bloc. And from my colleagues v Nikolai Sapozhnikov and Nikolai
Arefiyev. In education I would recommend the Rector of the Baumann
Technological University Yuri Fyodorov or the rector of Lomonosov
University Viktor Sadovnichii. The science and research and space
could be headed by Zhores Alfyorov and Svetlana Savitskaya. The
military, interior, and secret services could be headed by Leonid
Ivashov, Yuri Rodionov and ViktorIlyukhin: But don't think that
we have already made up our minds on all the appointments and
will recommend only these people and nobody else. Furthermore
I am not implying that all cabinet members today are bad. These
people are restricted by certain conditions and limitations. In
other circumstances the population would be satisfied with their
work. For example, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is the most
professional part of the present government. This is a professional
team and by and large should not be changed.
'United Russia' fears sabotage
Vyachslav Volodin, leader of the Fatherland - All Russia faction:
If you ask an American which party rules in the USA, he will
tell you - the Republican Party, and if you ask a British citizen
he will say the Labour Party. In our country individuals, rather
than parties, have tended to represent the authorities. If a party
bureaucrat is efficient, he brings a plus to the party he represents.
If he fails to fulfill his task, people will stop voting for his
party and the party will have to think about whether they need
such a minister.
In my view, formation of the government based on the party principle
is only possible in a society with developed democratic and party
traditions. I am certain that such a time will come to Russia
too. But we have to lay the grounds today. A decision on whether
the government after the elections is a coalition government or
a parliamentary majority government will depend on the way in
which the Russian party system develops and what is best for our
country by that time.
Vladimir Pekhtin, leader of the 'Unity' faction:
I think that the government should be formed by the party that
wins the parliamentary elections. In case of a coalition government
at best we will have to face constant resignations of ministers
from the opposition parties. And at worst we will have to confront
sabotage from the opposition.
The right-wing factions spotted some plotting here.
Boris Nadezhdin, Deputy Head of the Union of Right-Wing Forces
faction:
At present the government is formed on the basis of the results
of presidential elections and is largely a government of "courtiers".
It is formed from one person. That is why we see appointments
of childhood friends and former colleagues. It remains unclear
who is in charge of what: Minister Gryzlov starts scolding the
government and the prime minister berates deputy prime ministers.
You are witnessing total schizophrenia. You are witnessing a feudal
construction, when it is important to liberate the king.
Ironically, even if we adopt extremely democratic amendments
to the law on the government or the Constitution, asserting government
by parliamentary majority and sign up to these amendments, etc,
this model will to a large extent be controlled by the president.
Q: And why has such a fuss been raised about this
draft?
Nadezhdin: The development of the draft began
owing to one problem: the problem of 2008 and the young president,
whose second term will come to an end; i.e. the real task which
needs to be resolved now concerns the role of Vladimir Vladimirovich
[Putin] after 2008. The logical decision is to transform the President
into the equivalent of the "English Queen" who reigns
but does not govern, whose surname is Putin, where a strong prime
minister representing the parliamentary majority will have the
real power:
There are too many interests around this idea. In addition to
the important things I have told you, don't forget the electoral
interests of the former bureaucracy transformed into the 'United
Russia' party. They have to demonstrate that they express the
interests of the people, that the Deputy Head of the [presidential]
Administration Vladimir Surkov is not their boss and that they
could become members of the cabinet:
YABLOKO does not see any sense.
Grigory Yavlinsky,
YABLOKO's leader:
The talk of the centrists is attributable to their fear of the
government they support and proposals they always vote for. They
are afraid, as the government has always taken decisions that
will not lead to any improvement in the living standards of the population.
That is why the centrists either gather meetings against their
own government or collect signatures against a tariff increase:
They have decided to demonstrate that they are not linked to this
government at all. But this is not true. If they vote for all
the laws submitted [to the State Duma] by the government, then
it is their government. So this is again a show. Do they mean
that they will write a list to the President on the people they
would like to see in the government and that he will choose from
this list? Let them do it! Because they are his party! Why do
they have to make up the whole story?
The idea of a parliamentary republic deserves a serious discussion.
But if the President decides everything, and the party that obtained
a majority in the Duma can send him their wish list, then at present
the [Duma] majority has such a right. The problem is to take a
blank sheet of paper and decided what to write on this sheet of
paper:
See also:
State
Duma elections 2003
| 