Thursday, 21 June 2012
Prime Minister’s Final Statement In National Assembly
Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan made a final statement in the National Assembly following the debate on the government program.
“Dear National Assembly President, Dear colleagues,
Our political team made it easier for me to take floor as they addressed all those questions of interest to opposition.
I believe that my colleagues gave comprehensive answers to those questions which were also commented on by the Speaker of the National Assembly, the representatives of standing commissions and the leaders of coalition parties. I think they were able to substantiate the viability of our program.
We acknowledge that we are not at all faultless. Moreover, the leader of our political team has constantly urged us to be outspoken and transparent and take the lead in revealing our own shortcomings.
This is just how we used to work during all these years. But this stance of ours should not be misused by holding us responsible for such wrongdoings as we have not committed. The quest for fake arguments is a sign of weakness.
My government has repeatedly stressed that emigration is an evil and we should do everything so that no citizen could leave Armenia. Fake arguments and personal attacks are being attempted to insinuate that the Prime Minister has made erroneous statements while addressing media representatives.
Dissatisfied with such arguments, our opponents are trying to give a personal relish to the ongoing ideological debate which is not the right method for tackling serious political issues.
A second false accusation was made heard in this hall, namely that Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan has dramatically increased his personal wealth during the crisis years which is not the case, and I think that by doing so my opponents seek the sole objective of slandering and discrediting the head of government.
I urge my colleagues to refrain from going this way. This podium should not be used to insult, slander or discredit anyone as it brings no credit to an Armenian man and I think this is the wrong path.
Thirdly, the political debate has shown and, in that sense, I agree with the ANC’s political assessment that civil society has emerged in the Republic of Armenia.
Thanks to the efforts of our President, we managed to build an atmosphere of tolerance over the past four years so that the political debate stands much better today than it was a couple of years ago, which I feel is in the best interest of our society and our State. This is the way to progress which should be highlighted and hailed.
Coming down to the next issue let us see what fundamental problems are facing us and whether the government’s approach has been a long way off the reality.
Dear colleagues, please note that either this question was answered by the head of our parliamentary faction.
No new arguments were voiced during the debate. Any negative phenomenon mentioned by our opponents is addressed in the document: we propose approaches to solve the problems.
The fourth question is that we were unable to anticipate the crisis which is a fairly sound criticism. Yes, we did not, but who did better? Is there a government daring enough to predict the crisis and the challenges ahead?
The world’s best experts and the most powerful nations had no consensus on this issue, we could see that the whole world was concerned about the existing imbalances and everyone was sure that something was going to happen, but nobody seemed to know which way it might come and which country was to get the first blow.
Like anyone in the world, either we cannot predict the time and venue of the second wave just because it is a crisis.
The next issue is that of our achievements and failures. We answered it in dozens of articles. The world’s best experts were invited who stated that the government was abiding by an expansionary policy. We had a 7.7% deficit as we increased the level of foreign debt. You acknowledged it, but argued at that we had been “reductive” the same time. How shall we understand this? Do you not want to put up with the analyses and the facts?
The next question is what should we do? Were there any proposals concerning the program? I could not trace any recommendations or areas absent from the document.
There were specific suggestions in our opponent’s speeches, including the representatives of the ARF, Heritage Party and ANC, which should be the focus of my government. You may rest assured that we will take up any noteworthy recommendation made by you.
Of course, there may be differences in approaches, but I am sure that the discussions will help the government find realistic solutions.
Dear colleagues, wrapping up my speech, first of all, I wish to thank the National Assembly for interesting debate.
I think the culture of our discussions has been raised to a new qualitative level and I am convinced that it will contribute to the development of our country. At the same time, I can assure you that under the leadership of the President of the Republic of Armenia, the ruling team of the Republican Party and the Rule of Law Party is well aware of the challenges and risks ahead and knows which way we can cope with the task of national well-being.
I feel that by voting in favor of this program, giving us a vote of confidence, we can ensure sustainable development for our country. Thank you.”
The program of the new government was approved by the National Assembly with 75 for, 47 against and 1 abstention.
