Upcoming Ukrainian Parliamentary Elections

1. Victor Yanukovich on TV and Radio
ForUm
February 13, 2006

The leader of the Party of Regions Victor Yanukovich takes spart in five ox six TV live broadcastings weekly, the press service told. He held thirty fourty-five-minute addresses on the regional TV and radio channels.

He also took part in the broadcasting of the national TV channels – Inter, NTN, TRK, Ukraina and 1+1.

As a reminder, UT-1 National Channels twicly denied him in the live broadcasting.

Western newspapers, TV, interviewed him and Radio channels more than ten times, among them The Times, the New York Times, Handellsblatt, BBC and others.

2. Will Russian channels stop telecasting because of Yanukovich?
Ukrayinska Pravda
February 10, 2006

The activities of some Russian TV channels conflict with the Ukrainian legislature and may be treated as interference in election process.

This followed from Tuesday declaration of members of the Independent Expert Council on Mass-Media Election Activity, Liga reports.

In experts’ opinion, the political advertising of one political force vs open adverse publicity of the other in a live news telecasting at a foreign channel is an abuse of applicable law as well as interference in election process.

Head of Equal Opportunities Committee Oleksandr Chekmyshev considers necessary to suspend activities of such foreign channels through Ukraine’s cable system during parliamentary campaign-2006.

Experts’ report on activity of TV channels of the neighboring countries will be directed to the Central Election Commission and possibly to the court some of these days.

According to experts, RTR-Planeta is one of the channels which during news telecasting has demonstrated the fragment of pre-election advertisement of Party of Regions.

The story was about Yanukovich’s breakfast with journalists. It began as follows: “At Yanukovich’s headquarters they fight against cold in their own way: on the table there were strawberry, flowers and microphones. Eating biscuits, Viktor Yanukovich explained to the journalists why he was so sure in his victory”.

At the end of the item they showed the fragment of advertisement of the Party of Regions.

Before, the presentation of pre-election program of Our Ukrane bloc was telecasted too. But the audience managed to see only the backs of the main personages – Roman Bezsmertnyi, Yuri Yekhanurov and the host Olga Herasimyuk.

No information about party’s program, just a voice-over said that Yekhanurov had been in blue mood because of journalists having asked him about gas. In shot were the backs and heads of the backstage crowding deputies.

Among the experts participating in creation of the Independent Expert Council on Mass-Media Election Activity are: Vitaliy Shevchenko, Head of National Rada for Television and Radio, Andriy Mahera, member of the Central Election Committee, Oleksandr Chekmyshev, Head of the Equal Opportunities Committee and many others.

3. Yekhanurov compared Tymoshenko with Chornobyl
Forum
February 10, 2006

Prime Minister of Ukraine Yuri Yekhanurov considers that leader of BYuT Yulia Tymoshenko is “like a nuclear reactor”, which better to have in a team.

“I treat Yulia Volodymyrivna kindly, we were working in one government, but she is like a nuclear reactor. You know, if you have her in your team, there will be no problem – imagine the power –, but if not – then Chornobyl,” said Yekhanurov during his meeting with students of National Lviv University.

In response to the question concerning his estimation of Tymoshenko’s dismissal Ukrainian Premier noted that the biggest catastrophe for the last year was re-privatization, and, as a result, a decrease in investments. According to him, potential investors wait for elections results and do not hasten to bring capitals in Ukraine.

4. Lytvyn is challenging Yushchenko and Yekhanurov to debates
Ostrov
February 13, 2006

The chairman of Verkhovna Rada, Vladimir Lytvyn, is ready to participate in pre-election television debates with the president of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yuri Yekhanurov, as he said yesterday during the news conference in Cherkassy, according to 'Censor.Net'.

Per his words, prior to elections it is required to use all possibilities. 'The problem is just where, when and with whom,' he said.

V. Lytvyn told the journalists that had proposed to the state officials to meet in the live air to discuss this or that situation if their points of view do not coincide. 'We exchange our remarks though television but not our positions.' Lytvyn said specifying that he had proposed that both to Yushchenko and Yekhanurov.

The speaker stressed that he was ready to have the debate in any place 'without any preparation or papers, just looking into each other's eyes'. 'I wouldn't like to shout to each other through the channels as to who is superior. I would like to have the clear line of relations so that we could work as a united team, the name of which is Ukraine', the speaker stressed.

5. Few words in defence of Tymoshenko
Ukraynska Pravda
February 9, 2006

Volodymyr Kryzhanivsky, for UP
In response to Serhiy Kiseliov’s article

Lately it is often stated that all decisions ever made by Tymoshenko’s government were cock-ups. Many examples are being quoted starting with perturbations initiated by the Prime Minister regarding special and free economic zones.

A lot has been said about them. By the way if to consider the major reason they were established in the first place – to create favourable conditions for investors, then not everything is so bad in our realm, as Lysenko, the famous TV journalist, used to say.

Normal, real investors were not exactly shaking from fear despite the threats with which they have been bombarded by the experts and journalists. In “Zakarpattya” zone in particular neither Germans, nor other investors had not suffered any damages

A journalist from Mykolaev, Yuriy Gluhov, has told me an interesting story about the investors from Holland. Damen Group concern bought the famous “Ocean” manufacturing plant regardless of any free economic zones. The processes of purchasing was going ahead at the same time, without any major impact caused by the creation of free economic zone.

During the first few years of existence the stock venture Damen Shipyards Ocean was not at all registered as a subject of the free economic zone and was not using any privileges. It turned out that it was sufficient to pay the employees of the shipyard 8-0 times less then to their counterparts in Holland in order to sustain high profitability. During the first year under new management the enterprise was producing 6-10 times more output without any preferential terms on taxation.

But last year they discovered that they can get away without paying taxes in Ukraine. So they started writing letters. If to consider the effectiveness of free economic zones in general, it is worth mentioning that there are 2 more famous shipyards in Mykolaiv. The government owned “Named After 61 Communards” plant is hardly functioning. “The Black Sea Ship Building Plant”, which is owned by some Russian businessmen seems to be mismanaged and neglected.

There is many a good tune played on an old fiddle. The only thing that matters is who exactly is a performer.

But for our smart boys it is another business. What happens in the rest of the world? Before the free economic zones were set up there were no problems with import operations. There was no issues with export operations either. But in the middle of the country everything has to be paid, all the taxes and other business related expenditures. The procedures are the same in our case as well but just on paper. The real life is somewhat different. The weird business schemes set up by firms which would only exist for as long as one day would definitely impress even very experienced capitalist sharks.

So this lavatory has to be shut down. Only in the meat industry 500-600 thousand tonnes of meat had been smuggled with the help of such schemes. So the nuts were tightened. This had caused a great stir. The holy cows have been assaulted. There was only one thing to failed to remember, and mister Baranivskiy should have kept it in his mind. This hole should have been closed beforehand. He either had forgotten, or was willing to forget. So there you go – we have a meat problem to face.

Had this been happening under Yanukovich, only few opposition papers would mention this. But we live in the age of democracy now. Thus each paper proclaims “No meat, meat crisis!”. Now pensioners have got some petty money, they want to buy at least some lean meat. So there were some solutions. After a lot of pressure Ukraine started importing the merchandise from other countries, and the lamenting followed again “The local manufacturers are being choked”. Yes, they have not been choked with the smuggled goods, but when it is a legal import then it is a death verdict.

It is often being said that such methods is governing the economy manually. What is this conclusion based on? The same thing happened in the petrol business. If a cartel of entrepreneurs decide to increase the prices this is regarded as a means of market economy. But if in response the oil products are being imported from abroad, this is labelled as administrative “soviet type” pressure.

And the same happens, for instance, with meat, the majority of so called experts are confusing are confusing the Almighty with the righteous. Let us have a look at some basic figures.

According to statistics, the prices for fuel in 2004 increased 66,3% for diesel fuel, 62,5% for petrol-76, and 42,2% for petrol 95. By the end of the year the prices were 2,76 hryvnas, 2,6 hryvnas and 2,95 correspondingly. If the prices were increasing at the same rate in 2005, the prices for fuel would have been as follows: 4,59 hryvnas, 4,22 hryvnas and 4.2 hryvnas in the same sequence.

And what is the evidence in one year and a month time? 3,5 hryvnas, 3,1 hryvnas, 3,90 hryvnas. The difference is essential. However in 2004 it did not have any loud label attached to it, but in 2005, of course, it is no less than a “crisis”.

It would not have been too bad had it been only the representatives of the media who would come up with such announcements. But no! It was the friends from the “Orange Camp” whose voices were the loudest. A sugar “crisis”. The third and the last.

The same scheme was applied. Previously 200 thousand tonnes of raw sugar was imported by the 1st of June each year, but this year the Supreme Rada would not give in to allow this. And so would the boys from other government factions. Not all of them of course. The government was left with only one option – a suicide. No sugar was allowed from the government reserves either. And only when the government almost smuggled sugar from abroad, some 50 tonnes were given from the government pocket.

It has been labelled as “non market methods”. But is it really a market economy method to put not even the Prime Minister herself, but the country in the position when it facing a dead end? The rest of the world acts in a very simple manner under such circumstances. The market is influenced either using reserves, which were put aside in the previous year, or by importing from abroad. In overabundant years Americans are paying out subsidies to their farmers to stop them form putting grain on the market and reducing the price by increasing the supply. And then if it is a drought the grain from the storages is being utilized.

Yes, I believe the grain “crisis” has been mentioned as well. How not to add more salt?! However we have never had one. It has been proven impossible to get through without a word from Mister Nemtsov, a qualified physicist and the great connoisseur of the markets and our circumstances in particular

Especially admirable is how strongly our president’s aide from Russian “abroad” was outraged by the agreement between government and petrol traders to announce a moratorium on price increases. “The market has not even had a one night stand in here, I could not possibly imagine something of a kind happening in Russia.” Where you were, dear mister, when the same thing happened in Russia commencing on September 1st and till the end of the year.

The government had suffered few blows because of WTO. These parishioners were led by Serhiy Teriokhin. We are have been in the know for a while that mister Serhiy is essentially different from us, ordinary mortals. We think in words, but he thinks in taxes.

However he has failed to establish WTO oriented relationships with his ex colleagues in Parliament. However neither Mr Rybachuk, the vice president on Euro-integration, nor the first vice prime minister Mr Kinakh, who was in charge of partnership developments have not been successful on this occasion.

Everyone remembers the glorious end of this. Teriokhin has had his “good bye”, and the other two had received “a kick which has resulted in acceleration and a landing aside”. Rybachuk ended up on Bankova, and Mr Kinakh in the National Council for Security and Defence of Ukraine.

There is a justification for some lack of consistency, which is an accusation used most often to criticise the head of the government team. Firstly it is the method applied while forming the government. It is very difficult to imagine a set of criteria used to accomplish its formation.

In my opinion, the essential fault with this process was the absence of a core of any description in this business. This is where the main mistake made by Yulia Tymoshenko lies. She should not have agreed to work with such team. However it is unjust to put all the blame for this solely on her.

The desire to make one more step towards the top of the recognition pyramid and at the same time to have power despite of all resistance which is there. Those people who accuse Tymochenko that her pull towards power is irresistible, should attempt to find and name at least one successful Ukrainian politician, who would aspire towards power just for the love of art. That is why it makes sense to forget these fairy tales and to be honest while climbing the greasy pole.

The attempts to forget their positions prior to the victory in 2004 look hypocritical. During one round table on privatization matters the most renowned experts on this subject expressed their views: “one has to consider all the attempts in establishing justice with utmost care”. Viktor Andriyovich listened, thanked and confirmed: “All stolen properties would be returned to its proper owners”.

That was exactly the background for an action plan when they came to power. Just one appointment of Valentina Semenyuk is worth a lot. And when the problems occurred, everyone was quitting the game. And who is to blame. The daughter-in-law, for sure. Despite the fact that Tymoshenko was doing her best to abandon the idea of mass re-privatization, she is being held responsible for it.

Tymoshenko is often being accused of failure to develop working relationship with small businesses’ segment of economy. If to be entirely honest, the entrepreneurs who had suffered, were the ones who engaged in “Black” and “grey” schemes.

Obviously, it was impossible to give an order “Stop smuggling” if not to cut the oxygen for illegal scheming in custom offices and around them. 73% increase in customs’ receipts did not emerge out of nowhere. What about a 100% increase in VAT receipts?

Indeed, the government failed to achieve 2 things at once: to lower the tax and at the same time to increase the receipts from tax collection. Yes, it was desirable to get both, but at least on one front there was a success. The export figures went down, but where does the main contribution come from? Was it a real drop in the bulk of exports or was it due to the fact that it was impossible for fictitious exports to cross the border any longer?

What about a simple solution to stop the illegal scheming by inducing some limitations of reimbursement of VAT for the first year in operation for businesses? And this was done without obtaining permission from a very limited number of people, whose number is 20 or 30 in the whole country?

One day our wonderful people have to be taught how to respect the Criminal Code and to use solely legal means of earning money. So perhaps the enthusiastic defence council of the abused business Mrs Lyapina is going to be kinder towards the former government?

Yes, really perhaps it is true that the President and the Prime minister had different approaches with regards to basic economic structures. However why was it not so obvious in 2000-2001? She was very decisive then, but those were the market methods, not the socialist rudiments.

Which government and when has accomplished such dramatic changes in the social sphere? Had such pensions not been paid out and had some other changes in social sphere not taken place, how would it be possible to face people in the end of 2005? The major promises given on Maidan had to become reality. And regardless of what the opponents may say, this has been done.

That is why it is not reasonable to distort the figures and play around with terminology. It is astonishing to hear such game of words “the investments rate slump” and “the rate of investment reduced 10 times.” Do not be alarmed, the investment has grown, and it was the amount invested in absolute terms was greater than in 2005.

It is being mentioned that the government is blocking presidents’ initiatives. But this is also not entirely true. To start with, was it possible that Tymoshenko on her own could have created major obstacles for those who work on Bankova? Where were Kinakh, Rybachuk and Bezsmertnyi at the time? Secondly, according to the Constitution, the President and “Our Ukraine” bloc have the right to come up with some legal initiatives.

So why had they been paralysed like a rabbit in front of a boa constrictor? And, thirdly what happened to these innovations during the last 4 months, who is to blame for creating obstacles?

Stalin once wrote a comment in Moscow Academic Arts Theatre guest book. After he had seen “Days of Turbiny” for the twelfth time, the great leader wrote “The author of the play is not to be blamed for its merits”.

And now I am going to pose a question that might fail you, dear sirs and madams. The achievements of the government which came to power a year ago could not be classed as insignificant. The figures speak for themselves. Everyone is familiar with the objective reasons which were in the way of further progress. Both internal and external. We know as well that everything is given to us by God. But it is possible that some of the sinners who dwell on the Ukrainian land had been involved. Some trying to facilitate the progress, some hindering it. Is it not so?

So this is a kind of anniversary we have. As Shevchenko said “with pleasure and not entirely without a moral”. Yes, with pleasure, because regardless all the reminiscences of many “well wishers” there was something we achieved and something we learned.

And what is the moral then? Let us not indulge into our favourite business which is creating idols. Even if the idol is as worthy as Victor Yushchenko. Or such an enchanting woman as the prime minister with a plait.

Volodymyr Kryzhanivsky is an Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary

6. Viktor Yanukovich is not allowed to come up at television by political technologists - Poroshenko
Ostrov
February 10, 2006

Petr Poroshenko, member of political council of 'Our Ukraine' bloc thinks that the political technologists do not allow for the leader of the Party of Regions, V. Yanukovich, to show up in live broadcast of 'Ukraine' TV channel, according to the press service of 'People's Union 'Our Ukraine'. Such opinion has been expressed by Poroshenko in live air of the Ukraine' TV channel, per information of the press service of the party 'People's Union 'Our Ukraine'.

'Though I would enjoy meeting him, for example, at your TV channel or '5th Channel' to talk honestly face to face. But Viktor Fedorovich could only be seen in advertisement films', Poroshenko said..

He also said that the Party of Regions is creating the myth of allegedly economic successes of Ukraine in 2004 during V. Yanukovich's premiership. 'At that time the economics has got 12-13 billion UAH in order to suborn electors, which, of course, brought to the significant inflation in 2005,'  Mr Poroshenko remarked

 7.Our Ukraine demands Tymoshenko’s answer about the orange coalition
Press Service of "Our Ukraine" Electoral Bloc
February 9, 2006

Our Ukraine Bloc asks the BYuT to stop playing games around the process of negotiations on restoration of the orange coalition. We appeal to return to a constructive conversation in a process of negotiations and not to continue the exchange of “compliments”.

Our Ukraine Bloc wants to sign an agreement on restoration of the orange coalition and initiates meetings of the five parties every day. We are aware that if the coalition is not restored, the parliamentary elections may give birth to an absolutely destructive Parliament we are observing nowadays.

It is time Ms Tymoshenko said, “Yes” or “No”. Nowadays the most important thing for those who stood on Maydan with Yushchenko is not to betray him. A year ago we took responsibility for future together and that’s why we must be in one team now, working for the sake of Ukraine. Our Ukraine Bloc is against political multi-vectorness of the Parliament that may create a real threat of return of Kuchma times to Ukrainian political circle.

We repeat once again. We do not negotiate with Mr. Yanukovych or the Party of Regions! A dirty history of Mr. Yanukovych when the results of the presidential elections have been falsified on his part is the main warning for us. We also do not accept ideology of the Party of Regions, which is based on federalism and attempts to divide Ukraine into three sorts. Then only people who want to hide their past by the deputy’s immunity are likely to represent the Party of Regions in the future Parliament.