Svyrydenko’s new government: a delayed decision and planted mines

Source: Author’s Facebook page

Svyrydenko’s government will probably become the record holder for ironic allegories for its creation. “Making beds”, “changing linen”, “shuffling cards”, “Tetris”…

The jokes, however, revolve around one thing. The new government has not become new. It is about moving people between chairs – just like in the famous fable. Unfortunately, with the same outcome predicted.

This approach steals time from Ukraine. Time is paid for with lives – and this is the biggest complaint.

In addition, the method and course of forming the Svyrydenko government poses many risks for the future – not only in view of the unchangeable course of Bankova.

First, the formation of a government of independent technocrats – a government of national unity/salvation – has been postponed. Loyalty remains the main criterion for officials – which will have a detrimental effect on efficiency.

But this government will be asked to “let it work.”

This is unlikely to fool anyone in society, let off steam, etc. It will only provide a formal excuse not to change anything in the way the country is governed – a method that proves inefficiency and wastefulness every day. And time is running out, the Russian bulldozer is crawling, Ukraine is bleeding.

Secondly, during the formation of the government, the wise men from Bankova created precedents that will still get out of hand.

They brazenly, with a cavalry charge, interpreted the Constitution of Ukraine and the law on the legal regime of martial law in such a way that resignation, they say, is not a termination of powers.

They didn’t even bother with changes to the law – they included the usual “because we can” and “if you can’t, but really want to, then you can.”

They have turned a blind eye to this for now – but the mine has been planted and could explode at any moment. Ahead are complex negotiations at various venues and levels, and it is better not to create any problems.

Let’s say it out loud: “replacing the president in the same way” will not work without elections. But the Ukrainian authorities have just shown that they can disregard the letter of the law. It has been noted in many capitals.

Thirdly, the absence of a coalition – or rather, a “faction that has coalition rights” – has been documented once again. 201 votes for the appointment of a prime minister, even fewer for the formation of a government – is yet another confirmation that the “servants” depend on crutches. On the remnants of the “regionals”-OPZH and business groups (to whom they have to give lobbying handouts).

Instead, the creation of a coalition of national unity, which would guarantee the comprehensiveness and independence of the government, is aggressively rejected on Bankova Street. And the “servants” are still afraid to challenge the OP. The roasted rooster has not yet pecked through the nest in the warm “servant” chair.

For the future, it will be necessary to stipulate in the regulations the obligation of the coalition to present live signatures of the participants. Governments will be more stable.

And it’s worth asking the closest “servant” what he/she is waiting for, and what his/her “plan B” is, if faith in Zelensky’s genius suddenly doesn’t pay off.

Fourth, during Svyrydenko’s appointment, Volodymyr Zelenskyy personally came out. Yes, about waiting for demobilization “until victory” – and in the meantime, there will be “rotation.”

I just forgot to add that demobilization – according to the Constitution and the law – is the responsibility of the president. So for “rotation” the same conditions must be ensured as for “demobilization”. Mobilization of a sufficient number of people.

And for this, it is necessary to solve the same problems that the OP is running away from, considering the harm to ratings. The mobilization process itself; preparation, its effectiveness and openness to control; provision for mobilized people. Solving problems with the SZCH. And so on and so forth. And here you can’t do without rudeness – it’s high time to present the results to the society.

Fifth, finally. Society once again did not hear the reports of the ministers who left – and those who remained.

The new prime minister promises a new program – which will probably have a good PR design (Svyrydenko likes to make bright and broad promises – let’s remember at least the “Ukrainian passport” for using revenues from subsoil for those born after 2019, or “GDP in a trillion in 10 years”).

But a host of very practical problems is accumulating like a snowball. And it is impossible to solve them with new promises.

… for now, Ms. Svyrydenko – of course, in Zelensky’s name, how else! – promises to introduce a one-year… moratorium on business inspections. That is, something that was completely within the executive branch’s control before. So far, it looks like the well-known game of “buy a goat – sell a goat.”

The effectiveness of the government will directly depend on the ability to adequately respond to challenges by ensuring budgetary funding for defense, scaling technological solutions, and utilizing the country’s full potential and capabilities (this is the “transition to new rails”).

That is, everything for which the Government of National Salvation should have been created. And instead of which we were shown a government of national Tetris. The key difference is the ability to say “no” to the corrupt, repressive, arbitrary whims of the Zelensky-Yermak office.

I would like to be wrong, but there is no hint of the ability of such a “shuffled” government.

So, we will return to the Government of Salvation. When the experts no longer talk about salvation, the masses will cry out. The question is whether it will be too late, and what the price will be.

Also follow “Pryamim” on Facebook , Twitter , Telegram , and Instagram .

• Materials published in the “OPINIONS” section reflect the opinion of the author of the publication, who bears full responsibility for the accuracy of the information.
• The editorial staff of prm.ua may not share the opinions expressed in the author’s material.
• The owner of the webpage in the “OPINIONS” section is the author of the publication.