Saturday, November 15, 2008

TV debate between all of Ukraine's former VR speakers

Watch Friday's two and half hour 'Inter' TV programme on the crisis inside the VR and the speaker' position, in which Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Leonid Kravchuk, Ivan Plushch, Volodymyr Lytvyn, Oleksandr Moroz, and other major figures take part, here

It's clear none of the participants wants early parliamentary elections. The last 40 minutes are probably the most interesting. There are clues as to who PoR may be supporting for new speaker on Tuesday..

4 comments:

elmer said...

Well, another 2 and 1/2 hour program that should have taken about 10 minutes.

Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, балакати, as one of the participants put it.

1) Poroshenko stole a line from the US: "recession is when your neighbor loses his job; depression is when you lose your job."

OK, so be it.

2) It's clear that a few of the participants simply don't get democracy, and are still looking for the sovok-style "strong man" to whom everyone can turn for directions and obedience.

3) When the commie Martyniuk mentioned that the commies were the only party that did not have oligarchs, the hosts promptly brought up the fact that the commies were receiving big rooshan money.

4) Yatseniuk and Lytvyn and most of the others and the audience got it (democracy) - the parliament ought to represent the people, not oligarchs. Clearly, the Pig Plyushch and the Konotop Witch Vitrenko don't get it. Neither does Forked Tongue Windbag Hanna Herman.

5) Yatseniuk brought up that fact that at least one-third of the deputies don't show up in parliament, and that if blanket immunity for parliamentary deputies was eliminated, an even greater percentage would not show up.

6) Interesting survey about party lists. Most people can recognize the person at the top of the party list, but virtually noone could recognize the 10th person on the party lists.

7) Yatseniuk or someone else made an excellent point - what's worse than people not knowing for whom they are voting on the party list system is that the deputies don't know their own voters. There was also a discussion about "majority" voting (meaning voting for individual candidates, as opposed to party lists), and how things are done in England and Germany.

8) EVERYONE agreed that there is no need for pre-term parliamentary elections.

9) The audience agreed that there is a need to eliminate parliamentary immunity.

10) Hanna Herman, the windbag snake who wears $50,000 wrist-watches and speaks with forked tongue for the Party of Regions, was oh-so-very-overjoyed that "agreement" was reached in the studio about pre-term parliamentary elections, and presumably about a whole host of other things. She ignored the fact that her party voted to oust Yatseniuk as Speaker.


11) Clearly, Plyushch, big fat PIG, one of the President's boys, likes back room deals, and likes pontificating about how he personally saved "pensions" and other things. He does not care for democracy - his deal is back room deals. The sooner the voters in Ukraine get rid of him, the better.

12) I did not think that there could be anyone bitch worse in Ukraine than the Konotop Witch Vitrenko. But there is - Hanna Herman with the Forked Tongue and Screetchy Fake Laugh. Think Wicked Witch of the West (from the "Wizard of Oz") in all her "beautiful wickedness" and multiply times a gazillion, and you get - Hanna Herman. Creepy.

The audience knew better than to trust her.

elmer said...

2 more things:

1) There was a brief discussion about financing parties - only 2 people in the audience were found who actually paid dues to a party. But there was no discussion about the huge problem of buying one's wayl onto party lists - and how to reform campaign financing.

2) There was also a short discussion about the role of Parliament versus that of the President. And there are some people who get it, like Yatseniuk.

Parliament should not be a rubber stamp for the President. In fact, one of the participants noted that decisions of Parliament ought not to be made at "Bankova" (the street where the President's office is located).

Despite repeated questioning by the TV hosts, none of the panel would volunteer who the next Speaker would be.

Ah, those coy Ukrainians.

Anonymous said...

Yats has got it completely wrong. Since when has the RADA been a rubber stamp for the President? That's about the last thing that could be said about it.

There's a ridiculous situation where the Pres is supposedly responsible and can do squat all because Parliament is completely fractured and everybody is doing their own thing and Yats' new party will jsut add one more faction.

elmer said...

Yep, yet another political party in Ukraine. Party, party, party, party.

But which one will the people vote for? They thought they had something with President Baloha, er, Yushchenko. But he betrayed them.

Well, the role of the President, and the role of Parliament was indeed a part of the discussion - briefly. There seemed to be a vaguely general consensus that the President ought not to interfere in decisions of Parliament, that decisions for Parliament ought not to be made on Bankova.

The problem is not whether the President is responsible. The problem is that under the current system, NOONE is responsible to the electorate.

I have said this before, and I will say it again, because this is the best illustration - whom does Yanukovych's son, a nobody member of Parliament, represent?

He certainly doesn't represent the people who voted for the Party of Regions - they did not know for whom they were voting. That was part of the discussion.

Worse, the deputies don't know their electorate.

So they fight amongst themselves, like a pool of sharks, representing -- oligarchs. That's who pays them, if they aren't one already.

And controlling the government is the goal - you make an "investment" in a campaign, so that you can use the government to get a return on your investment.

They don't seem to want to let go, so we have these discussions about pointless political fights.

It has finally become fashionable in Ukraine to TALK about representing the people, and doing something for the national interest, rather than fighting over government posts and power for the benefit of a few oligarchs.

But in Ukraine, when people say one thing, you know, for certain, that they mean exactly the opposite.

When they talk about the national interest, they mean their own oligarch interest.

And when they talk about representing the people, you KNOW that they are talking about representing - a few oligarchs.

The trick is - how to break out of this shark-infested cesspool?

And replace it with something better.