By: Lea Kalc Furlanič
“EU is important, and we must preserve it. At the same time, we also need to reform and strengthen it. If there is no significant shift to the right after the European elections next year, there is nothing good in store for us,” says Romana Tomc, a critical Member of European Parliament from the SDS/ELS. In her opinion, how is the EU dealing with all the recent crises that have befallen it? “Every crisis is different, and each one is in some way worse. We overcome one, and we are already in another, entirely different one. It seems that we are becoming less united. I think the last crisis we managed well was the financial crisis, which we overcame thanks to Juncker’s plan, which many doubted. After that, it has been mostly downhill. We are not united, it seems like we do not even want to be, and each country is looking for solutions for its own citizens. Despite all these problems, I believe it would be much worse if we did not have the European Union. After all, it provides us with some protection, we are stronger together, we help each other, we have the free flow of goods, people, and many other benefits that we might not even realise. Each country on its own would be very vulnerable in this global world,” she believes.
Dear Mrs. Romana Tomc, on social media platform X, you commented on Minister Luka Mesec’s misleading statement, where he cited EU rules regarding budget deficits as the reason for freezing social transfers.
There is no need to freeze social transfers. While the government is spending money on projects that could be postponed or even cancelled, and no tenders for non-governmental organisations have been cancelled, and there is a significant amount of money in Europe that they cannot bring to Slovenia, it is undignified to save on those who have the least. I agree that the social transfer system needs a thorough overhaul, but Mesec and Golob are reluctant to do so because they find it too demanding, and they know that many of their supporters would be disappointed. However, it is particularly twisted for the minister to use stricter European budget rules as a reason. It is simply not true. It is easiest to deceive people about things they are not knowledgeable about. Few people are well-versed in European budget rules. It is true that changes will come into effect with the new year. Nevertheless, there will be enough flexibility for countries not to have to save on the most vulnerable. I also advocate for careful handling of money, as excessive deficits are not acceptable, and we cannot borrow indefinitely. Lying to people in this manner is truly demeaning. I suggest that the government first scrutinises non-essential expenditures, as a substantial amount of money is squandered. They could also consider cancelling exotic and luxurious trips that serve no purpose.
In the European Parliament, there was also a response to the action of MP Jernej Vatovec, who, on the day of the Hamas attack on Israel, added a Palestinian flag emoji to his Twitter profile. What was the response of European parliamentarians to this action?
Vatovec’s statement did not go unnoticed. In addition to being noticed within the ELS group, it also garnered attention in Brussels news circles, where it was mentioned that Slovenia is one of the most pro-Palestinian oriented countries. There was a lot of disapproval. During the last plenary session in Strasbourg, we even saw some far-left MEPs who condemned the terrorist attacks by Hamas. The same cannot be said for the Levica party in Slovenia. What is worse is that they are a governing party in one of the EU member states. Meanwhile, on the streets, extremists gather in support of terrorism. In many countries, such gatherings have been banned.
In the European Parliament, you raised concerns during the debate on the new media legislation, particularly highlighting the situation at RTV Slovenia. You stated that what the ruling coalition is doing with RTV is the most blatant example of what should not be done in accordance with the new legislation. European Parliament President Roberta Metsola and EPP President Manfred Weber expressed their dismay. Colleague MEPs also find it hard to believe that such a brutal political takeover of a public broadcaster could occur in a democracy…
Indeed, they are truly shocked, you would not believe it. Even though some were reserved and at times sceptical not too long ago, as some doubted that such things could really happen in a democratic state, they no longer have doubts. It is challenging to explain to someone from “established democracies” what has gone wrong in Slovenia since gaining independence. That is why informal conversations are crucial for their understanding. Often, you have to repeat certain things, omit names that do not mean anything to them, and start with basic facts and build on them. I believe that all the effort you invest will eventually pay off. I must say that the understanding of the situation in Slovenia is now much better than it was a few years ago.
How is it possible that European Commissioner Věra Jourová is so biased regarding the media in Slovenia?
One might say, “birds of a feather flock together”. Jourová belongs to the same political family as the Golob government. Sophie in’t Veld, who primarily targets right-wing governments in the European Parliament, is also part of the same political group. The double standards are more than evident. They attack others, but not their own. They can afford to do so because the left has significant political dominance in the parliament. As for the European Commission, which is often seen as a collection of bureaucrats detached from reality, who seemingly care little about the truth, it is not even worth wasting words on. That is why it is crucial for the right to win in the upcoming European elections and bring about some change. Our European way of life is also at risk if the left regains dominance in the next term.
Is there hope that the new European media legislation will be effective for RTVS or that RTVS will adhere to it?
We can say that time will tell. The final decision has not been made within the institutions yet. The next step is the trialogue, negotiations among all three institutions, the European Parliament, the European Commission, and the European Council. If we are very optimistic, we can expect the final act to take place in the early part of next year. By the time the legislation starts to be implemented, we may have a new composition in the European Parliament and possibly a new Commission. It will be interesting to see what demands large countries like France have regarding the media act. They have already had many requests for surveillance of journalists in cases where national security is at risk. We all know how quickly this can be abused. After all, even the Slovenian law on public media was passed through a fast-track procedure, which is intended for times when national security is at risk.
The Golob government has not implemented any of the promised reforms, ministries are falling apart, and the Prime Minister, after increasing their number, is now leaning toward their consolidation. Most likely, in the European Parliament, they view this as extremely irresponsible governance of the country. Does Slovenia still have any standing in Brussels?
Brussels does not concern itself with the number of ministries a country has. However, those who supported an increase in ministries even in a referendum should be concerned. What an embarrassment! It is completely irresponsible for the Prime Minister to change decisions from day to day. It indicates that the ruling party does not really know what they want. Well, they definitely know what they want when it comes to their personal interests, but the interests of Slovenia are not their priority. They are seen as collateral damage. When the current government leaves their positions, and it is not a question of if but rather when, they will leave behind a mess that will need to be cleaned up for a long time. Regarding Slovenia’s reputation in Brussels, I can say that it is certainly not as they try to portray it in the media. The government led by Golob, and the ministers are extremely arrogant at home, but when these individuals come to Brussels, they are rather unassuming and not very visible. The number of microphones in front of them when answering questions before meetings is the clearest indicator of their importance. Usually, there are only three microphones: two from RTV (national broadcaster) and one from STA (Slovenian Press Agency). When Janez Janša came to Brussels, there was a crowd of journalists wanting to hear his statement.
The increasing number of unauthorised border crossings into the EU is causing chaos on all migrant routes. How do you view the EU’s unsuccessful handling of the migration crisis?
The EU’s unsuccessful handling of the migration crisis is one of the major failures of European politics. I believe that what is happening to us is not merely the result of individual desires of people wanting to come to Europe but rather an organised attack on our sovereignty and the European way of life. Behind it, there are many different interests and a considerable amount of money allocated to ensure that illegal migrants even reach our borders. Some are still willing to look the other way, lump all migrants together, justify human trafficking, and downplay the terrorist attacks that are happening on European soil as a result of this. And such individuals are sitting in governments and parliaments shaping migration policy.
In your opinion, what strategy should the EU adopt and implement to effectively curb the immigration of migrants from the third world into the EU in line with all societal, political, and ethical norms? Is there even enough political will for this?
First and foremost, we should seal our external borders tightly against illegal migration. No excuses. We should also immediately ensure the strict enforcement of a return policy. People whose asylum requests have been rejected have no place in the EU. Then we should address the migration issue in the countries of origin. We talk a lot about this, but we do relatively little. We should negotiate agreements with the countries from which the most illegal migrants come and clearly inform them that if they do not make efforts to stop human trafficking, they will not receive development and humanitarian aid from the EU. Entry points should be established in these countries. There has not been enough political will so far, but I believe that this could significantly change. The events of the past few days will automatically push us to find a solution. There is no other way.
Slovenia is becoming a migrant hotspot, and the number of criminal acts related to migrants is increasing, causing citizens to no longer feel safe. What could the government do at this time to alleviate this situation?
The government should implement controls at the external borders, protect the residents, and return individuals who cannot be accommodated and do not have the right to asylum. Vigorous measures are necessary to protect citizens. Given that Austria and Italy are closing the border for us, there is no other option. The turning point will also come when attacks and criminal acts in Ljubljana increase to the point where even the supporters of the parties advocating an open-door policy are affected. Illegal migration must be prevented at all costs. I believe this will also be one of the significant themes in future elections. Slovenia is finally supposed to start monitoring the border with Croatia. This has been delayed, and the consequences of a delayed response are already significant. Given the current situation, it is truly necessary. However, we will only see whether the control is effective after some time. At this point, it is too early to say, as there is a difference between the announcement and implementation. It has often been shown that there is a significant gap between these two concepts in the Golob government.
The government is slow in helping to address the consequences of the August floods, and some flood victims have still not received the promised state financial aid. The damage estimates have been changing within the government. Do you think this is due to the government’s incompetence or something else?
The case of the floods clearly illustrates the difference between promises and implementation. The promises were substantial, yet people still do not know what their fate will be. If the Janša government had acted as slowly and ineffectively, the consequences of the COVID crisis, both for people’s health and the economy, would have been catastrophic. Another issue is the assessment of the damage. The way the figures increased, reaching nearly ten billion euros in the end, suggests that the government realised it could use the floods as an opportunity to carry out projects that have nothing to do with the floods. I fear that various “friends” and “non-governmental organisations” will also want a piece of the pie, and they certainly will not be the ones dealing with the actual flood response. The problem will arise if the spending of the money is not transparent.
How do you assess the significant budget shortfall in the Republic of Slovenia, which the Fiscal Council has been warning about? How do EU institutions view it?
The Fiscal Council has been highly critical in its assessment of the budget, and I share that assessment. European institutions will also provide their assessment, but it is not binding. It is almost always possible to word things in a way that allows them to pass. However, the budget problem – the fact that in Slovenia, we have significantly fewer revenues than expenditures – does not hurt European bureaucrats; it hurts us. The gap can be reduced by either increasing output with the same expenditure or decreasing expenditure with the same revenue. We can also incur debt, but the current conditions in the money market are not the best, especially in light of the fact that the economic growth projections for Slovenia are not positive. Money is therefore quite expensive, and the burden of repayment will fall on future years. I believe the government should do everything it can to support the economy to prevent it from stalling. As an export-oriented economy, we are highly dependent on what is happening in other countries. Prospects there are not the best either, so the government’s attention should be even greater. If the economy grinds to a halt, it will be severe. This was well understood in the government during the COVID crisis, and that is why we implemented all the measures under the PKP framework. These measures helped us maintain and even strengthen our economic potential compared to other EU countries. Raising taxes and imposing new burdens on both individuals and businesses to increase budget revenue is an economic pitfall at this time.
In the spring, you warned Finance Minister Klemen Boštjančič about the issue of disbursing funds from the Recovery and Resilience Plan. Slovenia was highlighted in the European Parliament as one of the cases where the implementation significantly lags behind the planned timeline, risking the loss of part of the funds. How is this situation today, and why?
In October, Slovenia revised its plan, citing floods as the reason. The European Commission also approved the new plan. However, even before this year’s floods hit, the government had cancelled most of the laws and plans prepared by the government of Janez Janša. Among these was the law on long-term care, which was supposed to be financed with European funds, and several infrastructure projects. Unfortunately, what else can I say. The fact is that the government is having difficulties with accessing European funds. Incompetence is one reason, and another is likely the inability to agree on which projects to include in the programme. There is a lot of European money, but it is not just given away for free. You have to show and prove that you are delivering on the promises made when submitting the programme. If there are no results, there is no money. And so far, there have not been any results. Another issue the government faces with EU funds is that they are subject to scrutiny. They cannot be spent without proper oversight; tenders and expenditures are rigorously monitored. This does not sit well with many in our country who prefer to use funds from the national budget, where things can be hidden more easily.
Could you briefly explain why you warned European Commissioner for Justice Didier Reynders that this year’s rule of law report is a political pamphlet?
Because it is the truth, and not just for this year’s report. How else would you describe a report that praises the very things in Slovenia that other countries are fighting against? I also know that the sources for these reports come from the Slovenian judiciary, Slovenian non-governmental organisations, and from those Slovenian journalists who cling to the power that comes with media control. In addition, we all remember that Věra Jourová visited the President of the Constitutional Court during the time when the Constitutional Court was deciding on the law concerning the public broadcaster, but to this day, we do not know what they discussed at the meeting. This report is politically biased, the sources are unbalanced, and double standards are evident on both sides. It is a shame because a few years ago, the European Commission promised to prepare such a report, which held a lot of promise.
If we touch on the war in Ukraine, which seems to have no end in sight… What kind of atmosphere can be felt in the European Parliament and other EU institutions?
It seems like we are in a standstill, not moving forward or backward. All those who warned that the war would be long were right. It appears that the sanctions are not working effectively, and they are still being introduced based on the priorities of individual countries. We continue to pay Russia too much money for energy daily, which amounts to enormous sums. Moreover, we now have the war in Israel, which has somewhat diverted attention. Nevertheless, just this week, we in the European Parliament approved a new package of aid to Ukraine. What is missing is a breakthrough, but it is not yet on the horizon.
How successful has the agricultural policy of the European Commission been?
Agricultural policy represents the largest part of the European budget. I do not know how it could be evaluated as successful, but recently we have witnessed strange proposals from Brussels officials that, in plain terms, seem to have lost their way. They have gone so far as to make us wonder if, due to restrictive measures from the Nature Restoration Act, food security in Europe could be jeopardised. Can you imagine that? We would be denying ourselves food, giving up agriculture due to unattainable goals, mixing insect and worm proteins into our meals, and to ensure food supply, importing meat primarily from South America that should not be produced to any standards in Europe. Can you imagine this nonsense? Not to mention how long it would take for that meat to travel to us on ships that heavily pollute the oceans.
What is the political atmosphere in EU institutions in Brussels in recent days due to events in the Middle East (Palestine, Israel, etc.)? What are your thoughts on this?
It was a big shock for everyone. The terrorist attack on innocent civilians and the other attacks that followed it deserve every condemnation. We were completely united in the European People’s Party. We immediately condemned Hamas and recognised Israel’s right to self-defence. We have also supported humanitarian aid on the condition that it is ensured that it does not go to terrorists, but to people who need it. I am appalled at how many sleeper cells supporting terrorism there are in Europe. In Slovenia, too, we witnessed a rally at which slogans were shouted, which led to the banning of gatherings in many countries because they represent a call to violence. I do not know if there is any other country where a party that is part of the government would openly side with the invaders and demand the recognition of Palestine. Well, this happened in Slovenia. Another indication of how deep we have gone.
The European elections are just around the corner. Those who regularly follow your work, including the magazine Demokracija, can confidently say that you are very active, clear in your positions, unwavering in statements and demands to the relevant EU authorities, and you firmly fight against irregularities in our country. Are you satisfied with your work in the outgoing mandate? Do you have any plans for the future?
I am satisfied because I see that people appreciate my work and they also tell me that. They follow me, provide me with suggestions and ideas. In a way, it is a long-distance race. You have to build trust, be recognised among the people with whom you can do something good. Since my first mandate, my motto has been “Slovenia in my heart”. I always act in accordance with it. During my presidential campaign, I added two important principles: respect and collaboration. It was a slogan that came from the heart, and I stick to it. Sometimes, not everything goes as planned, and there is disappointment when you are not heard. But in the evening, I go to bed with a clear conscience. The next day, I make an even greater effort. I respect my voters, friends, and colleagues. I work to the best of my ability. Sometimes, some ideas may not succeed, but I am glad that I have always advocated for my values, the values of the party, and justified the trust I received with an unexpectedly large number of votes in the previous elections. I still have several ideas, which are still related to demography, the elderly, and, above all, Slovenia.