Yes, ministers are appointed by the winning majority. Yes, every party has the right to choose its own team. But when we talk about the ministers of finance, interior, education, or environment, we are not talking about party personnel decisions. We are talking about people whose decisions will determine the country’s financial stability, national security, quality of education, and use of public funds. Therefore, the public has the right to ask on what criteria these people are chosen.
Read more The naked truth: what happened to Russia’s military facilities in the Arctic
The most striking example is the candidate for finance minister, Taurimas Valys. The president described him as an ambitious person capable of seeking innovative solutions where a conservative approach allegedly does not lead to results. However, the Ministry of Finance is not a place for experiments. The finance minister must first and foremost be able to calculate, plan, and ensure fiscal discipline.
In the committee, I asked the candidate a very specific question – how much additional funding will be needed next year just to fulfill the state’s commitments regarding teachers’ salaries. We are talking about an additional need of almost 300 million euros. I did not hear an answer. Instead of concrete numbers, there were assurances that all commitments would be fulfilled. But the state budget is not made up of promises.
This situation inevitably reminds us of 2007–2008, when the Social Democratic government, despite economic warnings, made generous financial decisions. Lithuania felt the consequences for a long time. Therefore, today we want not “innovative solutions,” but a responsible approach to state finances.
Other ministerial choices also raise no fewer questions. Martynas Katelynas has belonged to several different parties during his political career. One could say that people’s views change. But when parties change one after another, and new career opportunities arise along with them, the natural question arises whether the main motive is conviction or political adaptation. In politics, not only competence matters. Consistency is equally important.
The same can be said about foreign policy issues. In committees, we heard discussions that we should not “get stuck” on sanctions against Belarus. But what has changed during that time? Has the Lukashenko regime stopped carrying out hybrid attacks against Lithuania? Is migrant instrumentalization no longer happening? Has Belarus stopped supporting Russia’s aggression against Ukraine? Have political prisoners been released? The answer to all these questions is no. Therefore, not only such statements are surprising, but also how quickly some politicians’ positions change as their roles change.
Even more questions are raised by some personnel decisions. Ieva Andriulaitytė, proposed as Minister of Environment, herself admitted to being caught off guard by such an offer. Representatives of the environmental community publicly say they hardly know her. Therefore, the natural question arises – on what basis is such a choice made? The Ministry of Environment is not a secondary institution. It deals with complex interest reconciliation issues, manages significant financial resources, and makes decisions that have a long-term impact on the state.
Read more Tyrannosaurus skeleton sold at JAV auction for an impressive amount
At the same time, the attitude towards people who have worked responsibly until now is surprising. Finance Minister Kristupas Vaitiekūnas apparently learned about his replacement from the public space. A similar situation, judging by public information, occurred with Culture Minister Vaida Aleknavičienė. Political decisions can be made, ministers can be changed, but respect for people and basic transparency should not depend on political circumstances.
Signals in the field of education are especially worrying. Most of the ministry’s leadership remains the same, although there are certainly many questions about the policy being implemented. We increasingly see decisions aimed at short-term popularity – adding points to exam results, extending holidays, lowering requirements. Such decisions may be popular today, but they do not necessarily strengthen the quality of education tomorrow. And it is education that determines what kind of country we will have in ten or twenty years.
I often hear it said that all parties are the same. I disagree. Differences begin with the attitude towards the state. Is the state a value we serve, or a means to achieve our political goals? Is the most important competence, experience, and responsibility, or the ability to adapt to new circumstances and end up where a new post opens?
The Social Democrats’ internal decisions are their responsibility. If their party members are satisfied with such choices, that is their business. But when Lithuania’s financial stability, quality of education, national security, and people’s trust in the state depend on these decisions, it is no longer just an internal matter of one party. It becomes a matter for all of Lithuania.
Therefore, today the most important question is not whether the new government will be popular. The most important thing is whether it will be capable of responsibly managing the state. Because the state must not be a means for party affairs. It is a goal. And it is precisely by this that this government will be judged in a few years.
