By Žiga Korsika (nova24tv.si)
The government of Robert Golob has headed into the summer holidays with several open fronts. Among the most visible are the Prime Minister’s disputes with the healthcare system, farmers, and employers. Political analyst, lobbyist, and expert in public communication, Miloš Čirić, believes that the government is indeed firm, as it still enjoys the support of parliament, but it is precisely this firmness that is harming the country. We also briefly discussed the situation in healthcare and the background of one of Golob’s early PR endeavours when he tried to take credit for the Sandoz investment in Prekmurje.
In the introduction, we ask Čirić which of the three major disputes is the most dangerous for the government and the country, to which he responds that it is undoubtedly the conflict between the government and the economy. “A good example is the difficulties faced by Krka. In Krško, they want to expand capacity, create above-average paid jobs, but unfortunately, they are facing bureaucratic obstacles. This is something they should be dealing with all the time or at least closely monitoring the progress of the projects. We need a workforce and the money they bring. If you want to finance anything, you have to take that money from somewhere. Therefore, I believe that the most dangerous conflict lies precisely in the economy. If it falls into serious trouble, the government will have problems, and so will all of us,” explains Miloš Čirić.
We remind the interviewee that at the beginning of this year, the Prime Minister embarked on a public relations offensive when it became clear that Sandoz would invest in a production plant in Prekmurje. Recently, there have been discussions about the credit for the largest one-time investment in the history of Slovenia. Former SDS deputy and mayor of Lendava, Janez Magyar, initially confirmed to us that the Prime Minister’s media appearances were unjustified since he had very little to do with it. As he explained, it was a decision made at the corporate level and not a political one. In the conversation with us, Čirić revealed who can actually take the most credit for the investment. “Perhaps the Prime Minister contributed something, but fundamentally, it is not the victory of the Prime Minister or his government. In my opinion, the most credit goes to Raul Intriago Lombeida, a member of Lek’s management responsible for logistics. He is a person who studied in Slovenia, originally from Ecuador. He has created a family here and has contributed the most to Novartis’ success in Slovenia. He is an example of what it means to have foreign students here and how much we can gain if they are the right people,” he explains.
In the open front with the economy, it is not just about investments. Recently, employers accused the government of being responsible for the breakdown of social dialogue and also criticised it for excessive taxation. “They are right. The Prime Minister has handed over this area to the Levica party, which is destroying the economy because they do not understand it. With good intentions, they are destroying the economy,” says Čirić. When asked if the Gibanje Svoboda party is not also to blame for this, as they should be the ones setting the political pace with their programme, he responds: “That is what the voters expected as well – that Golob, as a businessman, would take care of the economy. Currently, those voters are not very happy.”
“Many things could be learned from Austrians”
We also speak with the political analyst and lobbyist about another pressing issue. Soon after the formation of the government coalition, it became clear that it would declare war on the so-called “two-timers”. This is a derogatory term used to describe doctors who work both in the public healthcare system and in private clinics. The government also declared war on concessionaires. While in developed countries with well-functioning healthcare systems, concessionaires are part of the public health system, the Slovenian left sees them as a source of problems in healthcare. However, the war against private initiative is currently without a general. Danijel Bešič Loredan was forced to resign, and his position was temporarily taken over by the Prime Minister. There is practically no interest in the position. Since Slovenia will certainly get a new Minister of Health, Čirić is asked what qualities such a minister will need to have: “If the public debate continues as it has been, in which everyone interferes in the minister’s work, especially with the Levica dictating how and what the minister must do, then it really does not matter who the minister is. If the minister serves only to execute Golob’s instructions, then it is a bad sign for everyone.”
“Personally, I believe that we could learn a lot from Austrians. To begin with, we should start understanding the difference between public and state healthcare. It was quite amusing to observe the public reactions to the news from Austria, where they will allocate financial incentives of up to 100,000 euros to concessionaires in the future. These are the people we want to get rid of in Slovenia, but Austrians are using this approach to save their healthcare system. Finally, we should question what public healthcare really means. Is it about people getting access to a doctor when they need one or is it about having a state-run healthcare system?” asks the political analyst.
In the public, at least three names have recently emerged as currently “under consideration”. He did not want to speculate on the names, but he believes that it would be a shame if the position were filled by a doctor. There are already too few of them, and the Slovenian healthcare system does not have problems with personnel who are experts in treating people, but rather with organisational issues. The expertise of the future Minister of Health should focus precisely on these matters.
Problematic stability of the government
Čirić believes that Golob’s government is currently quite firm. It relies on support in the National Assembly, which it still has. However, this leads him to a paradoxical conclusion: “I fear that precisely because it is too firm, as strange as it may sound, it is harmful to it and to the country.”
He does not want to speculate on the longevity of the current government. “It is difficult to predict the future. For now, it seems unlikely that there will be significant changes until the last year of elections. At that time, there will be a much greater likelihood that something like that could happen,” he concludes.