Why everyone wants to reform the forestries, but speak of the PM’s resignation?

The forestry reform may amaze those who have not been following events closely. Consider yourselves – the “Farmers” are in support, the majority of the opposition as well, at least so far and only the Social Democratic party, unwilling to lose their feeding groups, are holding on like the four communars and refuse to back down.

So what’s the problem then? One would think the communars can be ignored, leave them on the sidelines, after all the voting train would simply roll over them.

What is being proposed by Ramūnas Karbauskis‘ “Farmers” and what the opposition propose is one and the same – the 42 forestries are to vanish one way or another. The difference is that the opposition proposes the Seimas would abolish the currently legislatively established mandatory number of forestries, while the Prime Minister can then enjoy his time with the foresters in the forest. Or not and apologize for the difficulties caused and simply fire all of them.

However R. Karbauskis did not even allow the Liberal patriarch to register the proposal. Only later, when E. Gentvilas managed to prove by other means that in the end he is a patriarch, he was promised such a legislative project could be presented to Seimas.

Would the opposition’s proposal hamper the cabinet in performing the reform? No such thing. All weekend I reviewed the social network profiles of various ministers and party leaders, but could find no complaints. Quite the contrary, all the “Farmers” and opposition leaders support forestry reform.

I posted on the profile of Minister of the Environment Kęstutis Navickas and received a response that the opposition’s proposal is in fact very suitable, apparently the cabinet’s initial proposal would have been like it.

At this point I don’t understand anything. Everyone agrees on the points, but both sides publically speak how the Prime Minister can resign, telling one another to go undergo some sort of exams. Why should he resign? Because both the “Farmers” and the opposition agree on forestry reform? How?

All of these paranoid talks are a storm in the Seimas cafeteria glass. Furthermore officers tempered in the police won’t back down this easy. Just ask how many times every patrol officer has been “fired” by stopped individuals? They are very much used to such things.

I believe that R. Karbauskis, in opposing the opposition’s proposal is simply trying to defend his Prime Minister from a mob of protesters (in such a case the reform framework would be made in the cabinet) and yet another decline in Farmer and Greens Union ratings. At the same time he is sacrificing his group members.

Criticism upon the cabinet is already spilling over the edges and at the same time every month the attacks from S. Daukantas Square have to be channelled away somewhere. The “Farmer” leader already has enough with some sort of dispatchers not allowing the Minister of the Interior to go exercise in time and was booed off in front of TV viewers.

If you continue to allow such booing at every minister, who will go work at the professional team? After all they aren’t politicians, they are not used to it.

I believe that R. Karbauskis is inclined to burn his group members on his party’s popularity bonfire. If the forestries are reformed only by Seimas, all the Farmer and Greens Union members will have to explain to voters and regional government in their districts why they are reducing work places in the region and thus risk sitting on the bench for another Seimas term.

The Farmer and Greens Union leader likely finds it convenient to sacrifice the non-partisan ones or party members who are less obedient and may turn into Liberals or Conservatives any day now, rather than a stable cabinet and Prime Minister. This is why he is making the Seimas majority shoulder the responsibility.

But what will the Farmer and Greens Union group members choose in Seimas?