Serhiy Lovochkin speaks about the government reset, the situation around Inter, about the villa in France and interesting politicians.
Government officials say that there are two political forces that seek early parliamentary elections: Batkivshchyna and the OPPOSITION BLOC. Amid falling approval ratings of the ruling parties, the ratings of these two parties are growing. And, in case of early elections, they could end up with more troops under the Rada dome. Some representatives of the pro-government parties blame individual members of the OPPOSITION BLOC for their support and influence on other policy makers and entire political parties. Segodnya.ua discussed with an Opposition Bloc leader Serhiy Lovochkin the “Lovochkin’s projects,” the situation around the Inter TV Channel, the villa in France and the snap elections.
- Let's start our interview with the current political crisis. The OPPOSITION BLOC, having spent so much time criticizing the government, gave 26 votes to recognize the work of the Cabinet unsatisfactory, and then just 15 minutes later gave only 8 votes in the vote of no confidence. Why did that happen?
- In 2014, after the parliamentary elections, a coalition was formed with 300 MPs in it. The coalition members informed Ukraine and the world that they assume responsibility for the reform program, governance, peace and prosperity in Ukraine. It’s been less than two years since then, and the coalition of 300 dwindled to the majority of 194, that is two thirds of the original coalition. They decided that the government no longer suits them, and they need to replace the Prime Minister.
Besides, let me also remind you that when the coalition was created, their members, calling themselves “democrats,” applied a new rule in the history of democracy - stripped the opposition of all mechanisms of parliamentary control. And the OPPOSITION BLOC, as the only opposition faction and the third largest one in the parliament, has not received any committee, nor the traditional for the opposition post of a deputy speaker, and was actually removed from the process of formation of the parliament agenda by the coalition. Since then, not a single important bill submitted by us was considered or voted for. It was an attempt to eliminate the opposition from the political life of the Verkhovna Rada.
In this situation, the Opposition Bloc position was completely logical: not only should we fire the Prime Minister and the government, we must first recognize that the coalition failed, and their performance was unsatisfactory.
- And yet, why didn’t the Opposition Bloc vote for the resignation of the Yatseniuk’s Cabinet?
- It seems that some MPs, particularly those who are new, believe that the essence of their political activity manifests itself in three algorithmic actions: button - finger - Facebook post. And the activity of their political forces is the aggregate of similar actions of members of these political forces. It is wrong. In fact, the function of a parliamentary faction is to take responsibility for its decisions. So if they propose to dismiss the Prime Minister, then they need to admit that there is no more coalition and that a new format, a new agreement are required, that based on this we undertake political commitments, form a new Cabinet of Ministers and appoint a new Prime Minister.
Therefore, the OPPOSITION BLOC faction made several decisions. First of all, we believe that the work of the coalition and the government is unsatisfactory - they failed at their job and did not deliver on their promises. We voted to recognize that. Secondly, the OPPOSITION BLOC will not be part of the majority in this parliament convocation with members of this failed coalition. Thirdly, the coalition should announce the termination of its existence and the existence of government created by it. We do not see the possibility to take part in the scam called “fire the government, and then we will talk business.” We demand from the coalition to make a decision on a new composition of the coalition or the dissolution of the Rada. Then we shall have re-elections, a new parliament, and the OPPOSITION BLOC will decide whether we shall be in the coalition and take responsibility for running the country.
For us the resignation of the Cabinet is, above all, responsibility, not a political game in the style of “finger - button - Facebook post.”
- But not only the OPPOSITION BLOC failed to vote for the Cabinet’s resignation. In the 15 minutes between these votes more than 20 MPs from the Bloc of Petro Poroshenko and others have been lost somewhere in the parliament hallways. Many pointed to the “hand of the State Department.”
- It’s a far-fetched explanation. The OPPOSITION BLOC position is very clear, and members of other factions should talk about their motives themselves. The reality is such that the coalition that formed the current government has ceased to exist, because 194 or two thirds of its composition passed a no confidence vote on the Prime Minister, and so he then has to say: “The coalition is gone, therefore I resign.”
The OPPOSITION BLOC has a clear position: the coalition is dysfunctional, the parliament is dysfunctional, we support the parliament re-election, the formation of a new coalition and the government, and in this case we are ready to take responsibility.
- If Yatseniuk still decides to resign voluntarily, will the OPPOSITION BLOC and you personally vote for this? Who could replace Arseniy Yatseniuk? We hear several names thrown around. Natalia Jaresko seems to be the most realistic nominee with the idea to form a technocratic Cabinet under her.
- Once again, we will not take part in a coalition in this parliament. We would like to see what kind of a coalition and the next government will be formed, and who will assume responsibility for what will happen in the country, what will happen to people, war and peace, social programs and the budget, and then we shall make a decision and vote.
Government dismissal is not a mechanical action, it is responsibility for what will happen on the following day. This should be understood by those deputies, who live in the “finger-button-Facebook post” logic. First you need to clearly determine what will happen next and then “take out” your Cabinet.
- Do you see someone, who can replace Arseniy Yatseniuk?
- There are dozens of candidates, who can cope not worse, even better than him. I believe that the current government has completely failed and the sooner it leaves, the better. But under the Constitution the Cabinet is a derivative of the coalition. If the coalition is dysfunctional, incapacitated and cannot cough up 226 votes even for a principled decision on the Cabinet resignation, then the following constitutional action must take place: early parliamentary elections, a new coalition and a new government. Otherwise we shall continue to run in circles in the show of collective irresponsibility.
- What do you think was the cause of this acute political crisis - ambitions, struggle for cash flows or corruption?
- You mentioned many reasons already. Undoubtedly, there are two major problems that became an insurmountable diagnosis of the current government: ambitions and corruption. This is not my verdict and not my diagnosis. It was given by the IMF. The Fund has already voted for the quality of work of the coalition and the government, when it made a decision not to send another tranche. The Fund does has not given any money since last year. Moreover, even soft-spoken IMF releases include references to “corruption.”
- The West flatly rejects early parliamentary elections, believing that they will play into the hands of the Kremlin. On the other hand, the tangle of political crisis may tighten so much that there is simply no other choice but to go to elections.
- “Who benefits from early parliamentary elections?” - This is a manipulative approach. One needs to take a different look at it: how do we create an effective coalition and government? If there is a way to do it in this Parliament - be my guest. But I do not believe it. The current coalition had over 300 members and nearly two years, and they did nothing.
I do not believe in the ability of the current coalition and the Cabinet to push reforms, to overcome corruption and ambitions. So re-election is a logical way out of the current situation. We can extend this crisis and play the game - let's try again, let’s pretend that we didn’t have these eighteen months... But I do not believe it. Do you?
- The Oleh Liashko faction may come back and form “a three party coalition.”
- So what? Just as before, this format has no prospects. Yatseniuk says: the privatization of land, we need to sell a million hectares immediately. Liashko says: we need to impose a moratorium immediately, there should be no privatization of land. This is a fundamental issue. How can a coalition with such controversial approaches on important issues as the privatization of land can build an effective development program?
Now the society and the state has a high demand for two things: development strategy and reform. The government produced several strategies, they also announced reforms, but so far nothing has been implemented, the country is still where it was before. And again, this is not my assessment, this is the assessment of international rating agencies. Ukraine does not develop and does not change for the better. So, we need a reset.
- Let's talk about the Opposition Bloc. Earlier you made announcements about the imminent rebranding and renaming the party into the “Party of Development and Peace.” “Restoration” was also one of the naming options until somebody used this name for their deputy group. Now we see that you have distanced yourself from the OPPOSITION BLOC. People in the party complain about your conflict with Borys Kolesnikov. What happened there?
- The Opposition Bloc is a well-established party that went a difficult political path over the last eighteen months. We started, as you know, not at the easiest of times - between the presidential and parliamentary elections. We had to convince voters that we could be trusted, and in six weeks of work we were able to get almost 10% of votes. During our time in Parliament, despite the fact that the coalition forces through their antidemocratic actions actually excluded us from decision-making, the OPPOSITION BLOC increased its approval rating. People’s trust in us is growing.
- According to recent opinion polls, you are at 12%...
- There are different polls, too. Our internal sociology shows that we are the most popular party in the country. This is not a majority of voters, but a significant part of them. If Donbas takes part in the vote, and we believe that it will, we shall have substantial support of people living there, who were denied the right to vote in the last few campaigns.
- Plus IDPs...
- In the last elections, 1.5 million people were disenfranchised by the government. It's not fair, it is anti-democratic and it has been recognized by European institutions a violation of human rights.
Regarding the rebranding: the name of the party is not important. What I believe to be fundamentally important values is what our team professes and the goals we set for us. The first and the most important goal of the OPPOSITION BLOC is peace in Ukraine, recovery and reintegration of Donbas. The next most important priority is to save the economy. A country, where news reports begin with shootouts and casualties, will never be an investment magnet.
Today Ukraine needs an effective and dynamic anti-crisis program developed not by visiting ministers, which have not been particularly distinguishable even at home, not theorist storytellers, who created nothing in life, but rather by people with management skills and experience. We have many such people in the BLOC, who know what industry production is. Not talkers, but managers with decades of manufacturing experience, directors, owners of major businesses.
Recently we submitted to the parliament draft amendments to the budget with the total of over 80 billion hryvnias, which we believe are possible thanks to adjustments in macroeconomic indicators, which the government calculated unfairly and laid as the foundation of the state budget. Besides, we insist on reducing the government spending by 14 billion hryvnias, this includes the government apparatus, unproductive costs of war, etc. We offer to raise the minimum wage and pension by a total of 62 billion hryvnias (1526 and 1958 UAH respectively). This will allow to offset real losses of people from 40% inflation and a catastrophic devaluation of the hryvnia. We suggest allocating 10 billion hryvnias for regional development, 11 billion - for education and health care, 5 billion more - for subsidies in the housing and utility sector, as after another increase in power prices and the subsequent increase in gas prices people will simply not have the money to pay for utilities.
- Coming back to the conflict with Kolesnikov... Party members jokingly called this conflict a dispute between the 15th and the 19th floors in the Parus Business Center.
- I like the word “dispute”. Truth is sprout in discussion. The fact that we get into arguments, disagree in some things, discuss things together, only strengthens our BLOC. I am grateful to colleagues for internal party debates. We have no contradictions, leaving alone conflicts. Because, again, we share common values and goals. Everything else is a discussion of how to achieve those.
- So do you plan to keep the OPPOSITION BLOC name?
- As for the name (the OPPOSITION BLOC - editor) - it is a up to the party congress to decide. We plan to hold the congress in late March to mid-April. Although the name of the OPPOSITION BLOC now meets the current place of the party in the political spectrum of the nation, people know it and are comfortable with it. When we cease to be the opposition, the name will surely be different. I think it will happen soon.
- There was a lot of talk that Serhiy Lovochkin will create his own political party.
- Parties are created not by individual personalities, but by people united around an idea. When a party is built around its leader, it is very short-lived. So I am a supporter of the approach that parties should be established in the classical way, i.e. by an association of people, just as we did here in the Opposition Bloc.
- The phrase “Lovochkin’s project” has become a commonplace. Let us briefly discuss this. In the run up to the early parliamentary elections of 2014 many media outlets wrote that your man Igor Shuvalov managed the campaign strategy of the Radical Party.
- We were not involved in the Radical Party strategy.
- Does it mean that neither you, nor your allies have any relation to the Radical Party whatsoever?
- The Radical Party is an independent political party with their own leader, their constituents and ideology. We wish them success.
- What about Serhiy Leshchenko? A year ago, Mykola Martynenko blamed you and Firtash for a smear campaign against him, which was allegedly led by Leshchenko at that time. Allegedly, it all started because of amendments to the law on natural gas market, after which, according to Martynenko, Firtash had lost control over oblast gas distribution companies.
- It is not true. Firtash continues to control his property, including his gas distribution business. But decisions taken by the government put the entire industry on the brink of survival. Artificially lowered tariffs negatively impact businesses to the extent that they struggle to pay their staff. Not to mention the fact that each of these companies should have the financial capacity to ensure gas supply safety. We remember the tragic events in Dnipropetrovsk and other cities, where due to the lack of sufficient funds for safety and network upgrades accidents occurred. Today the management of each gas distribution company, under pressure from the government, are working in unique circumstances, ensuring gas supplies and the safety of buildings in severe financial conditions.
- Boryslav Bereza? He seems to be a very frequent guest of Inter programs.
- Boryslav Bereza is a new policy maker, he is an interesting person, people watch him.
- Fine. A year later Martynenko accused Leshchenko of working for Grigorishin. In turn, Leshchenko accused you of illegal enrichment, of purchasing a villa in France worth 40 million euros. And supposedly, it has not been declared.
- Such statements (that Leshchenko is a “Lovochkin’s project” - editors) affect Serhiy. If someone makes claims that a journalist or a politician acts in someone’s interests, it is a natural desire to respond somehow and show something. It is a normal reaction, and I take it in stride.
The speculation is that these assets were linked by nominee directors. Nominee directors are part of the service that is provided by audit firms serving clients that work in different jurisdictions. I also use the services of an auditor who provides such nominee directors. But these nominee directors do not work for me exclusively. They have other employers, with whom I have no affiliation. Therefore, such speculation is wrong.
Regarding the property that belongs to me and my family, my biggest investment is a portfolio investment in the Inter TV Channel. Besides, it is no secret that we have assets in the chemical industry, in the energy sector, in gas distribution, river transport, oblast energy supply companies, in real estate, including some foreign assets. All of these are portfolio investments.
We do not manage business operations, we are investors in these companies. Thus, we have a significant stake of absolutely legitimate investments made via companies that are located in different jurisdictions. We declare all of this in accordance with the law of Ukraine, Cyprus, France and other jurisdictions, depending on the asset location.
- Ryabikin, the main contender for the post of the Minister of Infrastructure, was exposed of having close links to you and Firtash. Although, at the same time, he was alleged to have some ties with Martynenko as well. Do you know Ryabikin?
- I know almost everyone in this country who is involved in politics and public administration. Does he have any relation to us? I don’t think so. Neither to me, nor to Firtash.
So such loud allegations about linked persons and common interests are often just a product of a primitive smear campaign on Facebook and the result of low qualification of the people making such allegations.
In general, the inclusion of various pseudo experts and PR activists in the party lists did not pay off, as loud accusations of corruption, and their talk about reforms remain allegations and fantasies. This parliament showed that idealists without real life and management experience are absolutely useless in terms of progress.
- The recent scandal around the Inter Channel. Maria Stolyarova worked for the National Information Systems.
- What we see happening with the Inter Channel now is a raider attack launched by one of the pro-government political forces last year. This corporate raid continues to this day. The incident with Stolyarova, which was quickly picked up and fanned into a fire, the picket of radicals near the Inter office, the court hearing with the involvement of Maliatko - these are all elements of that raid.
- You are often called the gray eminence of the Ukrainian politics. Also, you have often been seen in the presidential administration. What did you do there, with whom did you meet? It’s been rumored that you wanted to enlist Bankova support, but something didn’t work out.
- I like the word “eminence,” but do not like the word “gray.” As for the Administration, let’s put it this say: I now meet with many people, just like I did before.
- Some people say that you tried to negotiate with the current government on political preferences for the OPPOSITION BLOC and for you personally.
- There has been a lot of speculation on this subject. Starting from the “Vienna Talks” and ending with the current negotiations on the government's resignation. The task of our political force is to defend and protect the interests of our voters. If we need to talk with the authorities about this, then we’ll talk to them.
- The topic of the Maidan protests and your mysterious disappearance on the night of November 30 has not been covered so far. You responded to public allegations made by Viktor Yanukovych on EuroMaidan dispersal. But you never mentioned anything about the fact that throughout the night of November 30 you were out of range, even though diplomats were trying to reach you on your phone.
- My phone worked all night. I received the first phone call at seven in the morning. One of the most influential diplomats called and asked me: “Are you aware of what is happening?” - “What’s happened?” - “Turn on the TV.” When I saw the picture of Maidan, I started to reach out to several senior officials. Gradually, the understanding of what happened there began to settle in, and then I decided that I would resign. It was an emotional, and yet absolutely conscious decision. I could no longer be in the government that did this to the peaceful protest. Throughout the next six weeks I did everything in my power to prevent a scenario with the use of force pushing the authorities to find a compromise with protesters. In those days, I interacted with the Maidan leaders, diplomats and people in government, who had a say in finding a peaceful solution. After the “Laws of January 16” were passed, I realized that further efforts are useless, but even then it was impossible to imagine the nightmare, which occurred a month later, in February. Starting from January 17, 2014 I was no longer in contact with the authorities and did not appear on Bankova Street.
- German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier hopes that elections in the occupied Donbas will be held in the first half of 2016. How is it possible at all if the ceasefire is not observed?
- The Opposition Bloc shares the position of the EU and the US on the need to implement the Minsk agreements. We hope that Ukrainian authorities will take all necessary measures to achieve peace and that Russia becomes an active participant in this process. As a political party we are ready to take part in the election process, become part of the new Ukrainian authorities in Donbas, look for ways to further demilitarization, reconciliation and recovery of Donbas.
We need to return Donbas to normal life. To make it possible, one needs to solve two complex issues: the first one being a military settlement, the second is a political one. They must be addressed in parallel.
A road map for a political settlement must be formed as soon as possible. This can be done, above all, through the formation of legitimate authorities based on results of local elections in Donbas. Now this topic is actively discussed in intensive negotiations.
- Medvedchuk recently spoke of a transitional government of Donbas.
- With regard to the mechanisms of political administration in the territories of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, it is s not going to be an easy decision. Elections should provide new infrastructure and shape the government there. It will take a lot of skill to fill it with people and build its work. Local councils that will be elected there, the composition of the executive bodies that will be formed - the whole mechanism needs to work together. This is a difficult governance challenge. It will take time, but there is no other way. As for the names, whether it would be the government or the executive committee, or the interim administration, that is a secondary matter. The question is how to do it in the fastest and the most effective way possible.
- If we start with a political settlement now, we risk to see in the so-called “transitional government” of Donbas separatists and militants supporting Russia and the “Russian World.”
- People will vote for the future. I do not think the military will dominate there. When a political settlement formula is found, and people will be able to vote freely - and I think this is the only possible solution - people will vote for those, who can provide development, peace and prospects.
- Now Europe is broken into two camps: one supporting the continuation of sanctions against Russia, while others want to return to “business as usual”.
- Without a doubt, no one wants the continuation of sanctions. Sanctions limit the economic freedom, and the philosophy of a united Europe is a free market. Sanctions are a signal that some of the basic values are violated (the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine by Russia - author). When the situation will change, sanctions against Russia will be stopped. But mutual Ukrainian-Russian sanctions hamper the economic development, kill jobs. In the future, as the settlement progresses, I support the idea of lifting the sanctions. We as a political party will fight to restore production and economic relations with all CIS countries, first of all, with Russia as the largest market for Ukrainian goods, ensuring that this cooperation creates new jobs and generate taxes for the Ukrainian budget. There is no other way, we cannot re-orient the entire industry to the EU market. Many goods that Ukraine produces will not be in demand in Europe for many years ahead. Therefore, to recover from the crisis, we need to fight for peace, conflict resolution and markets.
- Do you maintain a dialogue with Russia?
- Certainly.
- At what level?
- At the political one. The government also maintains a dialogue with them, and we should not be ashamed of it or try to hide it. Had the Ukrainian authorities given more time and effort to a dialogue at the highest level possible, we would not have had such a conflict. Had they started to look for diplomatic solutions, reconciliation and dialogue since the first day of the standoff, perhaps the situation would have been different. But at that time the confrontation was politically advantageous for the government, they played politics and elections...
Let me give you a recent example. Eighteen months into the war we suddenly begin to ban flights between Ukraine and Russia. Is this a problem for Russia? I am not sure about that. But it is definitely a problem for Ukrainian carriers and passengers. Hundreds of millions of losses, people cannot visit their relatives in a normal fashion. But this is a political game of playing “patriots,” and based on the government’s plan it was supposed to add some points to their approval rating (after closing the sky with Russia - editor’s comment). This has not happened. As a result, we have negative economic and humanitarian consequences, the policy makers, who started this, have not received any positive political returns.
- Where did the idea to move the capital of Ukraine to Kaniv come from?
- The OPPOSITION BLOC has several draft amendments of the Constitution, and even some competition of ideas. But the main thing about it - we have common values: in all drafts developed by the OPPOSITION BLOC, we have more democracy, a parliamentary governance system, real decentralization and a fair judicial system. In the draft with Kaniv its authors used the US experience, where the state capital is not its largest city, allowing to exercise the governance functions more effectively. Kazakhstan also has this experience.
- Where do you see yourself after the reset of the government?
- Life will show. For me, at this stage the main tasks are peace, reforms, development, a new Constitution, strengthening our political party. Returning to the subject of the Constitution, I think that at this stage a parliamentary government model with deep decentralization of government functions would be more effective for Ukraine. [The state - author] should have the monopoly in defense and foreign policy sectors, while the management of the economy should be delegated to the local level. All taxes, wherever possible, should be collected and kept at the local level. Locals will govern better. Not from day one, of course. But ultimately it will increase the effectiveness of public administration, enhance the quality of education and health care, because locals will develop their own budgets, teach and treat their children.
- You speak of the implementation of the Minsk agreements, which include a provision on constitutional amendments. And then you say that Ukraine needs a new Constitution.
- There is no contradiction here. A new Constitution may form the basis for the implementation of the Minsk agreements. Adopting a new Constitution is a revolutionary way, which not only could give the country peace, but also form the basis of new unity, give a strong impetus for development.
Meanwhile, the government remains within the framework of reforming the current Constitution model. The problem arose, when the redistribution of powers through decentralization was linked with the implementation of the Minsk agreements. Half of the parliamentary factions, including the OPPOSITION BLOC, see nothing that has to do with decentralization in the proposed law. On the contrary, it is about the concentration of power and, in fact, a revision of the current Constitution model. This has led to the current constitutional impasse. It adversely affects the Minsk process. When we talk to our foreign partners, they ask: “Is it really that hard to pass the Constitution?” When we begin to explain, they do not understand why everything is so complicated...
The OPPOSITION BLOC position on the Minsk agreements is simple - we are ready to vote for anything that will bring peace to our land.
Follow @serhiylovochkin