Ukraine may expect the comeback of a ghost of an early parliamentary election in 2010. This secret is widely known as after the presidential election in January-February 2010, the winner (whoever it will be) would surely want to take it all, and to form the majority in Parliament using the effect of his recent victory.
The same point of view has confirmed Volodymyr Lytvyn, Chairman of the Parliament of Ukraine and a newly registered presidential candidate. In May 2010 Ukraine will have snap parliamentary election, he told journalists today.
He emphasized that ‘under the current circumstances in Parliament, a lot of problems will appear’, that’s why the new President will surely try to nail down a success. The key position in country will be the Prime Minister’s office, Mr. Lytvyn added.
Showing posts with label Verkhovna Rada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Verkhovna Rada. Show all posts
Monday, October 26, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
The April Fool’s Day. Ukrainian Parliament scheduled presidential election to be held three months earlier than it was expected – on 25 October 2009.
The Parliament of Ukraine has decided today to schedule the next presidential election on 25 October 2009. Just to remind, previously most of MPs and experts suggested the election of President has to be held in January 2010 – 4 years after the Inauguration day. The decision of Verkhovna Rada was a kind of an answer to the Presidential address to Parliament (yesterday).
Actually the real background of today’s vote of Ukrainian Parliament is hiding not exactly in the speech of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, and even not in his unexpected idea to change a Constitution by himself, or to introduce a two-chamber Parliament with a rather weak Lower House.
There is a rumor that the Presidential Secretariat has already drafted a Decree to dismiss the current Parliament and to call for a snap parliamentary election in a nearest future. To stay ahead, all the parliamentary factions united in common decision: to cut the presidential term of Mr. Yushchenko for 3 months. The second, but not less significant goal of the MPs was to secure their immunities: the Constitution says the Parliament shall not be dismissed during 6 months before presidential election.
401 of MPs voted in favor of “25 October”, 7 – the Presidential part of Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction (United Center party) – voted against. Vyacheslav Kyrylenko, member of OU-PSD, addressed his colleagues during the parliamentary debates: “What are we afraid of? Early parliamentary election? Dear Mr. Speaker, do you have information on the respective Decree of the President? Please, make this information public!”
What's next? Viktor Yushchenko is going to challenge the decision of Parliament in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. “This decision is not legal, this decision does not correspond to the Constitution”, he said today. “All of them are going to lose before the October… The election will be held in due time, provided by the Constitution of Ukraine”.
The version of the Constitution of Ukraine acting in 2004 (when Mr. Yushchenko was elected) says the presidential election should be held every four years. A current edition of the Constitution provides that the President shall be in power during four years after he assumed the office.
Actually the real background of today’s vote of Ukrainian Parliament is hiding not exactly in the speech of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, and even not in his unexpected idea to change a Constitution by himself, or to introduce a two-chamber Parliament with a rather weak Lower House.
There is a rumor that the Presidential Secretariat has already drafted a Decree to dismiss the current Parliament and to call for a snap parliamentary election in a nearest future. To stay ahead, all the parliamentary factions united in common decision: to cut the presidential term of Mr. Yushchenko for 3 months. The second, but not less significant goal of the MPs was to secure their immunities: the Constitution says the Parliament shall not be dismissed during 6 months before presidential election.
401 of MPs voted in favor of “25 October”, 7 – the Presidential part of Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence faction (United Center party) – voted against. Vyacheslav Kyrylenko, member of OU-PSD, addressed his colleagues during the parliamentary debates: “What are we afraid of? Early parliamentary election? Dear Mr. Speaker, do you have information on the respective Decree of the President? Please, make this information public!”
What's next? Viktor Yushchenko is going to challenge the decision of Parliament in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. “This decision is not legal, this decision does not correspond to the Constitution”, he said today. “All of them are going to lose before the October… The election will be held in due time, provided by the Constitution of Ukraine”.
The version of the Constitution of Ukraine acting in 2004 (when Mr. Yushchenko was elected) says the presidential election should be held every four years. A current edition of the Constitution provides that the President shall be in power during four years after he assumed the office.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
“After this speech, I’ll pass to Speaker Lytvyn my project of a new Constitution ”. Viktor Yushchenko addressed the Parliament of Ukraine.
The President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko has addressed the Parliament today with his annual speech. Mr. Yushchenko failed to appear in Verkhovna Rada with his speech last year - the parliamentary tribune was blocked - but this time he has fully made up for lost opportunity.
The ordinary presidential speech with the expected call for all the political leaders to stop fighting and unite all the forces for saving Ukrainian economy in crisis times was finished with a surprise. President informed that he's going to introduce to Parliament of Ukraine a new project of the Constitution of Ukraine - right now.
Viktor Yushchenko proposes a dramatic change of the very system of powers in Ukraine. First of all, he wants Ukraine to have the two-chamber Parliament, and to reduce a number of MPs.
According to President, the Lower Chamber of the Parliament of Ukraine shall be elected by proportional voting system (like today) with open political party lists. The Lower Chamber will form the Government and control its work. "The inability to form the Government will lead to the dismissal of the Lower Chamber, but not all the Parliament. In this case the work of the Parliament will not stop," Viktor Yushchenko noticed.
The Upper Chamber should be elected among the representatives of regions of the country - using the majority voting system. It will work in lose connection with the President of Ukraine, in particular, dealing with the security issues. Every district of Ukraine will have 3 Senators elected.
"The political turbulence will be left in the Lower Chamber of Parliament", Viktor Yushchenko thinks. "President, together with the Upper Chamber, will secure stability of the state".
The President of Ukraine called for an urgent examination of his project of the Constitution of Ukraine in Parliament.
The ordinary presidential speech with the expected call for all the political leaders to stop fighting and unite all the forces for saving Ukrainian economy in crisis times was finished with a surprise. President informed that he's going to introduce to Parliament of Ukraine a new project of the Constitution of Ukraine - right now.
Viktor Yushchenko proposes a dramatic change of the very system of powers in Ukraine. First of all, he wants Ukraine to have the two-chamber Parliament, and to reduce a number of MPs.
According to President, the Lower Chamber of the Parliament of Ukraine shall be elected by proportional voting system (like today) with open political party lists. The Lower Chamber will form the Government and control its work. "The inability to form the Government will lead to the dismissal of the Lower Chamber, but not all the Parliament. In this case the work of the Parliament will not stop," Viktor Yushchenko noticed.
The Upper Chamber should be elected among the representatives of regions of the country - using the majority voting system. It will work in lose connection with the President of Ukraine, in particular, dealing with the security issues. Every district of Ukraine will have 3 Senators elected.
"The political turbulence will be left in the Lower Chamber of Parliament", Viktor Yushchenko thinks. "President, together with the Upper Chamber, will secure stability of the state".
The President of Ukraine called for an urgent examination of his project of the Constitution of Ukraine in Parliament.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Open Lists. Ukraine has learned how to hold free and fair elections, but it’s not enough to be called a true democracy.
In this post I would like to turn back to the question of the reform of electoral law in Ukraine. There are a lot of talks about how to change the way Ukrainians are electing the Parliament (I’ll stay away from the analysis of re-distribution of powers) or local Councils, but the very idea of reform is completely distorted. Instead of having a serious talk about the very details of a new electoral system that will fit to Ukrainian realities in a best way, most politicians are trying to switch the public attention to active, but non-effective discussions around one point – a need to move from the closed-party-lists to open-party-lists scheme, in frames of the current proportional voting system. I think it’s not enough at all.
Since the Orange revolution of 2004, all the elections in Ukraine were recognized as free and fair. But as a result of these free and fair elections, we, Ukrainians are receiving – again and again – the Parliament full of come-and-go people. The majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine doesn’t make any serious decisions, but only thoughtlessly presses the “yes” or “no” buttons, in accordance with order of faction leaders. It has to be changed.
According to the current electoral law, Ukraine elects its Parliament on a base of proportional representation system with closed party lists. The system stipulates that Ukrainian citizens vote not for individuals, but for parties, which are receiving seats in Parliament proportionally to the amount of votes they had won. Every party draws up a list of its candidates for the seats in Parliament, but it must make public only the names of five first persons from the list. A couple of hundreds of other candidates may be hidden until the end of the vote – it’s a provision of the closed-party-lists type of proportional voting system.
As a result, according to the closed-party lists scheme, Ukrainians are voting not for all members of Parliament, but are only choosing between “groups of five”. Even if a party makes public the entire list, the electoral campaign has been centred on a little group of party leaders. And after the elections Ukrainian voters may realise that the party they voted for has in its list, for example, a personal massager of the party chief, or the secretary of a party sponsor. A very big problem of the current electoral system is also the fact that the Members of Parliament has almost no officially established connection with the regions of a country. People simply don’t feel they have a real representative in Parliament: there is no one to be called “my MP”.
It is naive to think that the problem will be cured, if all the party lists were open in its literal meaning – becoming public before the elections. Ukrainian parties are mostly based not on the ideology, but on their leaders who are associated with all the party. And the majority of Ukrainians will keep voting for the personalities they like, not taking care about any lists. (And even if an old woman from the village has an opportunity to read all the lists of all the parties, she will surely not be able to analyse them properly, and to estimate how much people from the list she may see in Parliament after the elections. To make the outcome of the parliamentary election more democratic, there is a need to change the voting system as a whole.
As to my point of view, the best thing for Ukraine is to come back to the majoritarian (plurality) system of vote: the person, not a party should win support of voters, and should represent Ukrainian people in Parliament. Ukraine still doesn’t have a developed party system. Imagine, only about 3% of the citizens of Ukraine are members of any party. That means that 97% of Ukrainians doesn’t feel close to any political party at all. Proportional system was established, among other issues, in order to build up the party system in Ukraine. This idea failed: new-formed Ukrainian democratic political parties in reality are something between the oligarchic lobby groups and fan clubs of charismatic leaders.
In frames of the current proportional, party-based system of vote, the easiest way for Ukraine would be to switch to one of the models of open party lists, when a voter receives a right not only to vote for a party, but also to express his or her preference for a particular candidate(s) in frames of the party list. That means that voter indicates not only a name of the party he or she favours, but also names the favourite candidates from this party, or even indicates the order of preference. Such a model is widely used in the countries of Western and Central Europe. I would propose also to move forward from a single constituency scheme Ukraine currently has. In this case the parties will have to draw up several regional lists of candidates, giving a chance for regional leaders to be elected, and also establishing a stronger link between regions and Parliament.
There are other things which I think have to be done to make the parliamentary election in Ukraine closer to the best democratic standards:
1. To adopt an Electoral Code, a single document, which would incorporate all the rules (including technical) concerning holding parliamentary, presidential and local elections.
2. To form the Registry of voters (at long last) to avoid fraud.
3. To change the provisions of electoral law, re-establishing the so-called “absence certificates” for people who are not at home at a day of election (for ex., they are in the other region of Ukraine or abroad) to have a possibility to realize their Constitutional right to vote.
Since the Orange revolution of 2004, all the elections in Ukraine were recognized as free and fair. But as a result of these free and fair elections, we, Ukrainians are receiving – again and again – the Parliament full of come-and-go people. The majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine doesn’t make any serious decisions, but only thoughtlessly presses the “yes” or “no” buttons, in accordance with order of faction leaders. It has to be changed.
According to the current electoral law, Ukraine elects its Parliament on a base of proportional representation system with closed party lists. The system stipulates that Ukrainian citizens vote not for individuals, but for parties, which are receiving seats in Parliament proportionally to the amount of votes they had won. Every party draws up a list of its candidates for the seats in Parliament, but it must make public only the names of five first persons from the list. A couple of hundreds of other candidates may be hidden until the end of the vote – it’s a provision of the closed-party-lists type of proportional voting system.
As a result, according to the closed-party lists scheme, Ukrainians are voting not for all members of Parliament, but are only choosing between “groups of five”. Even if a party makes public the entire list, the electoral campaign has been centred on a little group of party leaders. And after the elections Ukrainian voters may realise that the party they voted for has in its list, for example, a personal massager of the party chief, or the secretary of a party sponsor. A very big problem of the current electoral system is also the fact that the Members of Parliament has almost no officially established connection with the regions of a country. People simply don’t feel they have a real representative in Parliament: there is no one to be called “my MP”.
It is naive to think that the problem will be cured, if all the party lists were open in its literal meaning – becoming public before the elections. Ukrainian parties are mostly based not on the ideology, but on their leaders who are associated with all the party. And the majority of Ukrainians will keep voting for the personalities they like, not taking care about any lists. (And even if an old woman from the village has an opportunity to read all the lists of all the parties, she will surely not be able to analyse them properly, and to estimate how much people from the list she may see in Parliament after the elections. To make the outcome of the parliamentary election more democratic, there is a need to change the voting system as a whole.
As to my point of view, the best thing for Ukraine is to come back to the majoritarian (plurality) system of vote: the person, not a party should win support of voters, and should represent Ukrainian people in Parliament. Ukraine still doesn’t have a developed party system. Imagine, only about 3% of the citizens of Ukraine are members of any party. That means that 97% of Ukrainians doesn’t feel close to any political party at all. Proportional system was established, among other issues, in order to build up the party system in Ukraine. This idea failed: new-formed Ukrainian democratic political parties in reality are something between the oligarchic lobby groups and fan clubs of charismatic leaders.
In frames of the current proportional, party-based system of vote, the easiest way for Ukraine would be to switch to one of the models of open party lists, when a voter receives a right not only to vote for a party, but also to express his or her preference for a particular candidate(s) in frames of the party list. That means that voter indicates not only a name of the party he or she favours, but also names the favourite candidates from this party, or even indicates the order of preference. Such a model is widely used in the countries of Western and Central Europe. I would propose also to move forward from a single constituency scheme Ukraine currently has. In this case the parties will have to draw up several regional lists of candidates, giving a chance for regional leaders to be elected, and also establishing a stronger link between regions and Parliament.
There are other things which I think have to be done to make the parliamentary election in Ukraine closer to the best democratic standards:
1. To adopt an Electoral Code, a single document, which would incorporate all the rules (including technical) concerning holding parliamentary, presidential and local elections.
2. To form the Registry of voters (at long last) to avoid fraud.
3. To change the provisions of electoral law, re-establishing the so-called “absence certificates” for people who are not at home at a day of election (for ex., they are in the other region of Ukraine or abroad) to have a possibility to realize their Constitutional right to vote.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Open Vote. Ukrainian authorities want to change the electoral law: to use it at the early parliamentary poll, combined with the presidential election.
Viktor Baloha, a Head of the Secretariat of the President of Ukraine, informed on Wednesday, 11 March that the Secretariat’s legal services are drafting proposals to change the electoral legislation in country. The objects of change are parliamentary and local elections. In particular, the Secretariat is going to propose to switch to the open party lists (in frames of proportional system). The relevant projects of law will be tabled in Parliament soon.
“Due to a current election system, we have the Parliament, which is considered by the majority of experts as the most unprofessional. Yesterday massage therapists, office-girls, guards, and drivers of party bonzes are working now as People’s Deputies (Members of Parliament. – T.V.). I am sure that they are exactly not the people Ukrainian voters wanted to delegate to power. Ukrainians want to know, whom they are electing”, Mr. Baloha emphasized.
One day before – on 11 March 2009 – the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko released the Member of Parliament of Ukraine Sergiy Holovaty (the oppositional Party of Regions) from his duty as a Member of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), the advisory body of the Council of Europe. Starting from this week, Maryna Stavniychuck, the Deputy Head of the Presidential Secretariat, is representing Ukraine at the sittings in the Scuola Grande di San Giovanni Evangelista in Venice.
The dismissal of Sergiy Holovaty, a lawyer, who is very respected in Europe, and in the Council of Europe in particular, was not a coincidence: the Venice Commission has examined two documents concerning elections in Ukraine on 14 March. Unfortunately, I still have no information about the decision of the experts of the Venice Commission on a Draft law of Ukraine amending the Constitution of Ukraine, initiated by Members of Parliament of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych (Head of the Party of Regions) and Oleksandr Lavrynovych (Vice-Speaker of Parliament, member of the Party of Regions), and a Draft law amending the Law on Election of People’s Deputies of Ukraine, initiated by Oleksandr Lavrynovych and Andriy Portnov (Block of Yulia Tymoshenko). I know only that the Venice Commission is not over-enthusiastic about the ideas to cut off dramatically the presidential powers in Ukraine. Anyway it is clear that the current President wanted to have a bit of influence on this decision.
The amendments to the electoral law may be used earlier than expected. The Speaker of the Parliament of Ukraine Volodymyr Lytvyn mentioned on 12 March that after the presentation of a mew electoral system, the call for the simultaneous presidential, parliamentary and local elections is quite possible. A Member of Parliament from Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence block Vladyslav Kaskiv also thinks that the early parliamentary election may be held as “the most easy way out”. Viktor Yanukovych also said he’s in favour of the simultaneous parliamentary/presidential poll in his televised interview.
Another news of the expiring week is that the leader of the Communist Party Petro Symonenko said he has already prepared the motion for the impeachment of the President of Ukraine. “Serving President has not ever infracted the Constitution and laws of Ukraine”, answered the Head of the Presidential Secretariat in the newspaper interview. “It is easy to explain the words of a member of democratic coalition Petro Symonenko. He is so inspired by Tymoshenko’s instructions that voters may not understand, whether he is a member of her party or the Head of the Communists”. According to Mr. Baloha, the presidential election will be held on 17 January, 2010. The Head of the Secretariat did not inform journalists, whether President is going to take part in the election.
Meanwhile, we had a very interesting public event here in Kyiv on Friday: around 350 people gathered near the building of Parliament, demanding to introduce the direct presidential rule in the country. “Crisis is a right time for the presidential rule”, their slogans said.
“Due to a current election system, we have the Parliament, which is considered by the majority of experts as the most unprofessional. Yesterday massage therapists, office-girls, guards, and drivers of party bonzes are working now as People’s Deputies (Members of Parliament. – T.V.). I am sure that they are exactly not the people Ukrainian voters wanted to delegate to power. Ukrainians want to know, whom they are electing”, Mr. Baloha emphasized.
One day before – on 11 March 2009 – the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko released the Member of Parliament of Ukraine Sergiy Holovaty (the oppositional Party of Regions) from his duty as a Member of the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), the advisory body of the Council of Europe. Starting from this week, Maryna Stavniychuck, the Deputy Head of the Presidential Secretariat, is representing Ukraine at the sittings in the Scuola Grande di San Giovanni Evangelista in Venice.
The dismissal of Sergiy Holovaty, a lawyer, who is very respected in Europe, and in the Council of Europe in particular, was not a coincidence: the Venice Commission has examined two documents concerning elections in Ukraine on 14 March. Unfortunately, I still have no information about the decision of the experts of the Venice Commission on a Draft law of Ukraine amending the Constitution of Ukraine, initiated by Members of Parliament of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych (Head of the Party of Regions) and Oleksandr Lavrynovych (Vice-Speaker of Parliament, member of the Party of Regions), and a Draft law amending the Law on Election of People’s Deputies of Ukraine, initiated by Oleksandr Lavrynovych and Andriy Portnov (Block of Yulia Tymoshenko). I know only that the Venice Commission is not over-enthusiastic about the ideas to cut off dramatically the presidential powers in Ukraine. Anyway it is clear that the current President wanted to have a bit of influence on this decision.
The amendments to the electoral law may be used earlier than expected. The Speaker of the Parliament of Ukraine Volodymyr Lytvyn mentioned on 12 March that after the presentation of a mew electoral system, the call for the simultaneous presidential, parliamentary and local elections is quite possible. A Member of Parliament from Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence block Vladyslav Kaskiv also thinks that the early parliamentary election may be held as “the most easy way out”. Viktor Yanukovych also said he’s in favour of the simultaneous parliamentary/presidential poll in his televised interview.
Another news of the expiring week is that the leader of the Communist Party Petro Symonenko said he has already prepared the motion for the impeachment of the President of Ukraine. “Serving President has not ever infracted the Constitution and laws of Ukraine”, answered the Head of the Presidential Secretariat in the newspaper interview. “It is easy to explain the words of a member of democratic coalition Petro Symonenko. He is so inspired by Tymoshenko’s instructions that voters may not understand, whether he is a member of her party or the Head of the Communists”. According to Mr. Baloha, the presidential election will be held on 17 January, 2010. The Head of the Secretariat did not inform journalists, whether President is going to take part in the election.
Meanwhile, we had a very interesting public event here in Kyiv on Friday: around 350 people gathered near the building of Parliament, demanding to introduce the direct presidential rule in the country. “Crisis is a right time for the presidential rule”, their slogans said.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
What’s up, Ukraine: a headless Foreign Ministry and new talks on early presidential race.
The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko declared she is in favour of the early presidential election in her country. “The sooner there will be presidential election in Ukraine, the better it will be politically cured”, she said in the column for French Le Monde, published today. Today Mrs. Tymoshenko is on the travel to France, where she’s meeting with French President Nicolas Sarcozy.
Yulia Tymoshenko thinks that the biggest mistake of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko is that he used some dirty weapon against her. “I always offered him my hand. I was only person during the Orange revolution he could rely on. I had never betrayed him. The struggle will end with his political suicide”, she added. When asked what could stop her from becoming president in the near future, she said: "Nothing!"
Meanwhile, The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine was sacked yesterday. 250 Members of Parliament of Ukraine voted in favour of the dismissal of Mr. Ogryzko: the oppositional Party of Regions, the Communists, and 49 lawmakers from the parliamentary Block of Yulia Tymoshenko. As the authoritarian rule inside the Prime Minister’s faction is a well-known fact, the result of this vote means that Mrs. Tymoshenko was in favour of the dismissal. “Ohryzko did not suit me as a minister,” PM said. “He is not professional, he is a person who has been making provocations against the government.”
Mr. Ogryzko, always loyal to Viktor Yushchenko, recently was in a center of scandal with Russian foreign ministry: he warned the Ambassador of Russia in Ukraine, ex-Prime Minister of Russia Viktor Chernomyrdin that he may become persona non grata in Ukraine for his critical statements. Before his dismissal, Volodmyr Ogryzko addressed Parliament on the recent ruling of the U.N. court, establishing the maritime border between Ukraine and Romania – it is considered as a big fiasco of Ukrainian diplomacy, as Ukraine in fact lost a big part of its territory inside the Soviet Union border (the UN-court decision may become a dangerous precedent for future attempts to change existing post-Soviet borders).
The press-secretary of President Iryna Vannikova said the dismissal of Ohryzko “was untimely and ungrounded.” “It makes absolutely no sense to weaken the country’s foreign policy, and to create new source of tensions in the middle of the economic crisis,” she emphasized.
Some Western media say that the dismissal of Ogryzko may shift Ukrainian foreign policy from pro-Western to pro-Russian. I would not agree with that. I’d better say that the Ministry of Foreign affairs was clearly not friendly to Russia, and also was often acting against the interests of its own country – Ukraine – moving the domestic political quarrels on the international stage. However, taking to the account the recent statements of Mrs. Tymoshenko in Le Monde, the last tendency mentioned above is not going to change.
Yulia Tymoshenko thinks that the biggest mistake of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko is that he used some dirty weapon against her. “I always offered him my hand. I was only person during the Orange revolution he could rely on. I had never betrayed him. The struggle will end with his political suicide”, she added. When asked what could stop her from becoming president in the near future, she said: "Nothing!"
Meanwhile, The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine was sacked yesterday. 250 Members of Parliament of Ukraine voted in favour of the dismissal of Mr. Ogryzko: the oppositional Party of Regions, the Communists, and 49 lawmakers from the parliamentary Block of Yulia Tymoshenko. As the authoritarian rule inside the Prime Minister’s faction is a well-known fact, the result of this vote means that Mrs. Tymoshenko was in favour of the dismissal. “Ohryzko did not suit me as a minister,” PM said. “He is not professional, he is a person who has been making provocations against the government.”
Mr. Ogryzko, always loyal to Viktor Yushchenko, recently was in a center of scandal with Russian foreign ministry: he warned the Ambassador of Russia in Ukraine, ex-Prime Minister of Russia Viktor Chernomyrdin that he may become persona non grata in Ukraine for his critical statements. Before his dismissal, Volodmyr Ogryzko addressed Parliament on the recent ruling of the U.N. court, establishing the maritime border between Ukraine and Romania – it is considered as a big fiasco of Ukrainian diplomacy, as Ukraine in fact lost a big part of its territory inside the Soviet Union border (the UN-court decision may become a dangerous precedent for future attempts to change existing post-Soviet borders).
The press-secretary of President Iryna Vannikova said the dismissal of Ohryzko “was untimely and ungrounded.” “It makes absolutely no sense to weaken the country’s foreign policy, and to create new source of tensions in the middle of the economic crisis,” she emphasized.
Some Western media say that the dismissal of Ogryzko may shift Ukrainian foreign policy from pro-Western to pro-Russian. I would not agree with that. I’d better say that the Ministry of Foreign affairs was clearly not friendly to Russia, and also was often acting against the interests of its own country – Ukraine – moving the domestic political quarrels on the international stage. However, taking to the account the recent statements of Mrs. Tymoshenko in Le Monde, the last tendency mentioned above is not going to change.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Next regular election of the President of Ukraine will be held in October 2009. Or in January 2010. Or in December 2010.
The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko made a very interesting statement yesterday. She said, “it left 9 month until the election of President” in Ukraine. It was not a kind of “slip of the tongue”: Mrs. Tymoshenko repeated the phrase about the nine months a couple of times. So, she will try to schedule the regular Presidential election for late October 2009.
The Head of the Committee on Judicial Policy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Sergiy Mishchenko said on Friday, 23 January that he has the information from the insiders in Presidential Secretariat that they are trying to agree with the Central Election Commission to hold the presidential vote in December 2010. Besides, Mr. Mishchenko himself is sure that the Presidential election should be held on 17 January 2010, counting this date from the Inauguration day of 23 January 2005.
According to Ukrainian law, the date of the regular election of President has to be scheduled by the resolution of Parliament.
A bit of history:
The Head of the Committee on Judicial Policy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Sergiy Mishchenko said on Friday, 23 January that he has the information from the insiders in Presidential Secretariat that they are trying to agree with the Central Election Commission to hold the presidential vote in December 2010. Besides, Mr. Mishchenko himself is sure that the Presidential election should be held on 17 January 2010, counting this date from the Inauguration day of 23 January 2005.
According to Ukrainian law, the date of the regular election of President has to be scheduled by the resolution of Parliament.
A bit of history:
The first President of Ukraine – Leonid Kravchuk – was elected in one tour on 1 December 2001.
In 1994 the early presidential election was held together with early parliamentary election: first tour took place on 26 June 1994, and the second tour – on 10 July 1994. Leonid Kuchma was a winner of presidential race, Leonid Kravchuk lost.The third presidential election in Ukraine was held in 1999: first tour was on 31 October 1999 and second tour – on 14 November 1999. The leader of the Communist party Petro Symonenko couldn’t beat President Kuchma, and he saved his post with more than 56% of voters’ support.
The first tour of presidential election 2004 was held on 31 October. Current President Viktor Yushchenko and current opposition leader Viktor Yanukovych met in a second tour on 21 November. The Central Election Commission declared the winner was Viktor Yanukovych. After the mass actions of protest, later called the Orange revolution, the Supreme Court of Ukraine cancelled the results of the 2nd tour on 3 December. The new second tour was held on 26 December. Viktor Yushchenko won with the result of 51.99%.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Parliamentary Control. Starting from today, a special Investigation Commission of MPs will follow the gas negotiations between Ukraine and Russia.
Today the Parliament of Ukraine has founded a Temporary Investigation Parliamentary Commission to follow all the developments of current gas crisis. The Committee is going to examine the actions of Ukrainian officials in the sphere of gas supply and gas transit in 2008, and also will follow the negotiations with Russian Gazprom in 2009. The questions of signing the new gas supply and transit contracts – including financial issues, like gas price – will be under everyday control of the Commission.
222 MPs voted in favour of the Commission’s founding: 174 members of the Party of Regions (total size of faction – 175 MPs), 27 members of Communist party (total size – 27), and 19 members of the Block of the Speaker Lytvyn (total size – 19). The Block of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT) and all the faction Our Ukraine – People Self-Defence (OU-PSD) didn’t support the idea of establishing the parliamentary control of gas problematic.
The new-elected Head of the Temporary Investigation Commission Inna Bogoslovska (member of the Party of Regions) promised to give the information on its findings to press every three days. “Our task is to speed up the signing of two contracts”, Inna Bogoslovska explained. On 6 February the preliminary report of the Commission will be presented in Parliament. The Commission (according to the size of every faction, it comprises 4 MPs from the Party of Regions, 3 MPs from the BYT, 2 MPs from the OU-PSD, 1 MP from BL and one Communist) is going to work during two months.
“It may well happen that, according to the results of this Commission’s activities, the question on the impeachment of President and the resignation of Government will be raised”, Inna Bogoslovska said. The leader of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych went further today, calling for the immediate Government resignation. The Communist party on its turn proposed to start the impeachment procedure as soon as possible.
P.S. I’m not going to comment a lot the today’s “blockade” of Russian gas transit to Europe as I still think that this “problem” is staged by some forces from Russia AND Ukraine. I would only add one point concerning the gas interests of Russia. It is important to pay attention to one interesting figure the Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin mentioned during his meeting with foreign journalists last week. He told that Russia might pay for the Middle Asian gas “on average $375 per tcm” in 2009. As the European gas prices (in most of the EU countries) are linked to the oil prices, and the oil prices are still falling despite of all the Russian efforts and the statements of the OPEC countries, it is reasonable for Moscow just to win time for extra negotiations, in particular, with the successor of Turkmenbashi. But I have to say that Russia will have to re-start gas export to Europe in a very short time – there are simply not enough of gas storage facilities on the Russian territory. In a while Moscow will face only two choices: to transit the gas to Europe or to burn it (or to close some gas wells), losing money Gazprom needs too much today.
222 MPs voted in favour of the Commission’s founding: 174 members of the Party of Regions (total size of faction – 175 MPs), 27 members of Communist party (total size – 27), and 19 members of the Block of the Speaker Lytvyn (total size – 19). The Block of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT) and all the faction Our Ukraine – People Self-Defence (OU-PSD) didn’t support the idea of establishing the parliamentary control of gas problematic.
The new-elected Head of the Temporary Investigation Commission Inna Bogoslovska (member of the Party of Regions) promised to give the information on its findings to press every three days. “Our task is to speed up the signing of two contracts”, Inna Bogoslovska explained. On 6 February the preliminary report of the Commission will be presented in Parliament. The Commission (according to the size of every faction, it comprises 4 MPs from the Party of Regions, 3 MPs from the BYT, 2 MPs from the OU-PSD, 1 MP from BL and one Communist) is going to work during two months.
“It may well happen that, according to the results of this Commission’s activities, the question on the impeachment of President and the resignation of Government will be raised”, Inna Bogoslovska said. The leader of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych went further today, calling for the immediate Government resignation. The Communist party on its turn proposed to start the impeachment procedure as soon as possible.
P.S. I’m not going to comment a lot the today’s “blockade” of Russian gas transit to Europe as I still think that this “problem” is staged by some forces from Russia AND Ukraine. I would only add one point concerning the gas interests of Russia. It is important to pay attention to one interesting figure the Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Putin mentioned during his meeting with foreign journalists last week. He told that Russia might pay for the Middle Asian gas “on average $375 per tcm” in 2009. As the European gas prices (in most of the EU countries) are linked to the oil prices, and the oil prices are still falling despite of all the Russian efforts and the statements of the OPEC countries, it is reasonable for Moscow just to win time for extra negotiations, in particular, with the successor of Turkmenbashi. But I have to say that Russia will have to re-start gas export to Europe in a very short time – there are simply not enough of gas storage facilities on the Russian territory. In a while Moscow will face only two choices: to transit the gas to Europe or to burn it (or to close some gas wells), losing money Gazprom needs too much today.
Monday, January 5, 2009
The High Treason. Non-settled gas dispute with the Russian Gazprom is leading Ukraine to energy bankruptcy and deep economy problems.
On 1 of December Russian Gazprom cut off gas supply to Ukraine. This news was among the top-3 in the entire world media during the New Year holidays. I think it would be first if there was no war in sector Gaza. The reasons of Gazprom’s actions are totally legitimate: unpaid debt for gas supply to Ukraine in 2008 and non-existence of a supply contract for 2009. Such a confusing situation seems to be not a terrible negligence of Ukrainian authorities, but a carefully planned scheme. The goal is to take the case to state of total mess, and then to re-divide the scheme of control of profits from gas supply to Ukraine. As a side effect, the State oil and gas company Naftogaz Ukraine may go bankrupt and Ukraine may lose control of its huge gas transportation system in favour of Russia or some Russia-leaded consortium.
These actions of Ukrainian officials can definitely be qualified as a high treason. But nobody will be charged for that.
There is no need to remind here the very details of the debt-dispute Russia and Ukraine had in late December 2008 – the media explained it very good. Talking in general, the Naftogaz Ukraine failed to pay off a debt for gas shipped from Russia in 2008: it paid $1.52 billion just one day before the New Year, but Gazprom claimed the total debt was $2.1 billion (including $450 million of penalties for the late payment for November and December gas shipments).
Current situation differs from the gas problems of early 2006. Now Ukraine has significant amounts of gas saved in storages: about 17 billion cubic metres (bcm) is owned by Naftogaz Ukraine, and the intermediary RosUkrEnergo (I’ll talk about this company later) has extra 11 bcm. That’s why there is no evidence of harm for Ukraine caused by the gas cut-off. Yet. But the gas battle with Gazprom will definitely influence the crisis-hit Ukrainian economy, pushing it down. World economy crisis reduced the industrial energy consumption in Ukraine almost by a quarter, and the main problems may be laid on shoulders of Ukrainian citizens. Higher gas prices will lead to rise of a gas fees for the households, which are heavily subsidising by the state.
The problem is that a dramatic raise of gas prise was not planned in the budget of Ukraine for 2009, approved by Parliament and signed by President before the New Year holidays. Moreover, a gas-supply part of the budget had been highly criticised even before problems with Gazprom went too far. The Deputy Head of the Secretariat of the President of Ukraine Oleksandr Shlapak said on 29 December that the 1.6 billion hryvnias, the budget assigned for Naftogaz Ukraine to keep low gas prises on the internal market, is not enough at all. “If we even manage to keep a gas price at $179.5 per 1,000 cubic meters (tcm) during the talks with our Russian partners, and the Ukrainian hryvnia’s rate to dollar stay at 7.5, there will be a need to compensate for Naftogaz Ukraine up to 9.2 billion hryvnias. Feel the difference”, he informed.
This means that in 2009 somebody will go bankrupt: either Naftogas, or Ukrainian citizens, or even Ukrainian state.
The gas price for Ukraine is really a painful question for years. In 2008 Naftogaz Ukraine had to pay $179.5 per tcm for gas from Russia, which is almost 3 times less than EU countries were paying. Due to the agreement to switch to market prices “step by step”, Gazprom offered the price rise to $250 per tcm for 2009. But it was already too high for Ukraine: it was going to pay not more than $201 per tcm (according to budget plans of the Government). As a result, Ukrainian officials didn’t sign even temporary agreement and left the country without contracted gas supply at all. Can somebody imagine such a thing to happen on a state level in any other European country?
It’s obvious that something is standing behind this artificially made conflict. It seems that the real source of Ukrainian gas problems, which may easily ruin the country’s economy, is a fight for the profits from gas transit and supply to Ukraine. As for this moment the only party of gas-supply scheme didn’t lose a cent from this situation is the RosUkrEnergo, the gas-trading intermediary between Russia and Ukraine. This company is making profit “buying” huge amounts of Russian gas on Ukrainian border and re-selling it to Ukraine (working also indirectly on Ukrainian domestic market) and some Eastern European countries (like Hungary and Romania). So, everyone who is in charge of RosUkrEnergo has guaranteed billions of profit. As for today, Russian Gazprom owns 50% of RosUkrEnergo, another half is under control of the commercial structures of Ukrainian-born businessman Dmytro Firtash. By the way, he also is linked with Ukrainian Nadra bank, which was accused by Yulia Tymoshenko in fraud with hryvnia rate in December (here is a link to my post about this matter).
That’s all I have time to write today. To be continued…
These actions of Ukrainian officials can definitely be qualified as a high treason. But nobody will be charged for that.
There is no need to remind here the very details of the debt-dispute Russia and Ukraine had in late December 2008 – the media explained it very good. Talking in general, the Naftogaz Ukraine failed to pay off a debt for gas shipped from Russia in 2008: it paid $1.52 billion just one day before the New Year, but Gazprom claimed the total debt was $2.1 billion (including $450 million of penalties for the late payment for November and December gas shipments).
Current situation differs from the gas problems of early 2006. Now Ukraine has significant amounts of gas saved in storages: about 17 billion cubic metres (bcm) is owned by Naftogaz Ukraine, and the intermediary RosUkrEnergo (I’ll talk about this company later) has extra 11 bcm. That’s why there is no evidence of harm for Ukraine caused by the gas cut-off. Yet. But the gas battle with Gazprom will definitely influence the crisis-hit Ukrainian economy, pushing it down. World economy crisis reduced the industrial energy consumption in Ukraine almost by a quarter, and the main problems may be laid on shoulders of Ukrainian citizens. Higher gas prices will lead to rise of a gas fees for the households, which are heavily subsidising by the state.
The problem is that a dramatic raise of gas prise was not planned in the budget of Ukraine for 2009, approved by Parliament and signed by President before the New Year holidays. Moreover, a gas-supply part of the budget had been highly criticised even before problems with Gazprom went too far. The Deputy Head of the Secretariat of the President of Ukraine Oleksandr Shlapak said on 29 December that the 1.6 billion hryvnias, the budget assigned for Naftogaz Ukraine to keep low gas prises on the internal market, is not enough at all. “If we even manage to keep a gas price at $179.5 per 1,000 cubic meters (tcm) during the talks with our Russian partners, and the Ukrainian hryvnia’s rate to dollar stay at 7.5, there will be a need to compensate for Naftogaz Ukraine up to 9.2 billion hryvnias. Feel the difference”, he informed.
This means that in 2009 somebody will go bankrupt: either Naftogas, or Ukrainian citizens, or even Ukrainian state.
The gas price for Ukraine is really a painful question for years. In 2008 Naftogaz Ukraine had to pay $179.5 per tcm for gas from Russia, which is almost 3 times less than EU countries were paying. Due to the agreement to switch to market prices “step by step”, Gazprom offered the price rise to $250 per tcm for 2009. But it was already too high for Ukraine: it was going to pay not more than $201 per tcm (according to budget plans of the Government). As a result, Ukrainian officials didn’t sign even temporary agreement and left the country without contracted gas supply at all. Can somebody imagine such a thing to happen on a state level in any other European country?
It’s obvious that something is standing behind this artificially made conflict. It seems that the real source of Ukrainian gas problems, which may easily ruin the country’s economy, is a fight for the profits from gas transit and supply to Ukraine. As for this moment the only party of gas-supply scheme didn’t lose a cent from this situation is the RosUkrEnergo, the gas-trading intermediary between Russia and Ukraine. This company is making profit “buying” huge amounts of Russian gas on Ukrainian border and re-selling it to Ukraine (working also indirectly on Ukrainian domestic market) and some Eastern European countries (like Hungary and Romania). So, everyone who is in charge of RosUkrEnergo has guaranteed billions of profit. As for today, Russian Gazprom owns 50% of RosUkrEnergo, another half is under control of the commercial structures of Ukrainian-born businessman Dmytro Firtash. By the way, he also is linked with Ukrainian Nadra bank, which was accused by Yulia Tymoshenko in fraud with hryvnia rate in December (here is a link to my post about this matter).
That’s all I have time to write today. To be continued…
Friday, December 26, 2008
…And the unexpected gift. The Parliament of Ukraine approved the Budget 2009 today.
Ukrainian politics is really full of surprises during this Holiday season. The Members of Parliament decided to come back to the State Budget question today, and suddenly voted in favour of this document. The pro-Governmental forces have managed to find four MPs needed to have 226 votes for the project of budget – from the Our Ukraine – People’s Self Defence Block. Now the budget is approved, and nobody cares about the figures and macroeconomic data anymore – it’s time for holidays. As a result, Ukrainian MPs have two extra free days this year: as was decided, they will not work on 30 and 31 December (but the next parliamentary sitting is scheduled for 13 January 2009). Happy New Year, Verkhovna Rada!
But the political problems in the country are – of course – not resolved. Today the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko will have an opportunity to comment a new budget during the live political show on Inter TV channel at 21.30 PM by Kyiv time.
But the political problems in the country are – of course – not resolved. Today the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko will have an opportunity to comment a new budget during the live political show on Inter TV channel at 21.30 PM by Kyiv time.
Expected gift – II. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine didn’t approve the budget 2009 again.
The Parliament of Ukraine voted against a budget 2009 three times this morning. MPs failed to approve the document as a whole, and then in the first reading. Parliament considered also a proposition to come back to the budget discussion today, but the majority voted against that. The problem is that the Party of Regions, the Communist party and pro-president part of the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence Block (MP’s Group “For Ukraine” founded by ex-Head of the faction Vyacheslav Kyrylenko) don’t support the budget project as it is today.
MP’s have decided to hold sittings on Tuesday, 30 December and Wednesday, 31 December. But a lot of people predict that Ukraine will start the New Year without a budget. Parliament will probably approve the document in January.
MP’s have decided to hold sittings on Tuesday, 30 December and Wednesday, 31 December. But a lot of people predict that Ukraine will start the New Year without a budget. Parliament will probably approve the document in January.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
It’s a democracy. The question calling the President of Ukraine to leave the country has won the biggest Internet rating.
Today the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko held his annual concluding press conference. In frames of this event he has answered a couple of questions of Ukrainian Internet users, which were submitted in advance. I was following the process of submission of questions with a big interest, as the most popular one appeared to be the following: Mr. President, how much money should the people of Ukraine pay to convince you and other top authorities to leave this country?
Actually, it is not a question but an attitude of Ukrainians toward President in particular, and all the ruling politicians in general. I voted for it, and a lot of my friends – almost all of the people I was talking with during last 2-3 weeks – did the same. I may say that Ukrainians of very different positions and ranges supported this question. For example, the link to this question I received by e-mail from my friend who is a housewife with a very active social position. Of course I didn’t believe that the question would be really asked. But it happened, and all the Ukraine has heard it during a live translation of the press conference on TV and radio. I have to mention that President was surely prepared for that. And tried to move the responsibility for this question outside the borders of Ukraine.
Viktor Yushchenko declared that “it is a provocation”, and that “the respected authors of this question are situated not in Ukraine, and don’t represent Ukrainians” (having in mind Russians, of course). “We even can not pose a question without help”, President assumed. Also Mr. Yushchenko said, “The real authorities should be half step ahead to show the way to nation”. The leader of nation shall tell, “our choice is such-and-such, we have to go in such a direction”, no matter “you like it or not”.
And some extra quotations of President I liked the most:
“The version of early presidential election is written not in Ukrainian offices”.
“Parliament is the most destabilising institution”.
“It is good when Parliament works like an aquarium – clear and visible”.
Actually, it is not a question but an attitude of Ukrainians toward President in particular, and all the ruling politicians in general. I voted for it, and a lot of my friends – almost all of the people I was talking with during last 2-3 weeks – did the same. I may say that Ukrainians of very different positions and ranges supported this question. For example, the link to this question I received by e-mail from my friend who is a housewife with a very active social position. Of course I didn’t believe that the question would be really asked. But it happened, and all the Ukraine has heard it during a live translation of the press conference on TV and radio. I have to mention that President was surely prepared for that. And tried to move the responsibility for this question outside the borders of Ukraine.
Viktor Yushchenko declared that “it is a provocation”, and that “the respected authors of this question are situated not in Ukraine, and don’t represent Ukrainians” (having in mind Russians, of course). “We even can not pose a question without help”, President assumed. Also Mr. Yushchenko said, “The real authorities should be half step ahead to show the way to nation”. The leader of nation shall tell, “our choice is such-and-such, we have to go in such a direction”, no matter “you like it or not”.
And some extra quotations of President I liked the most:
“The version of early presidential election is written not in Ukrainian offices”.
“Parliament is the most destabilising institution”.
“It is good when Parliament works like an aquarium – clear and visible”.
Monday, December 22, 2008
What’s up, Ukraine? 15-21 December 2008.
Falling currency . On Thursday, 18 December the Ukrainian hryvnia dropped to its historical low against the US dollar – 10-10.5.
Less than a half of the year ago US dollar cost around 4.8 hryvnias. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko declared that the hryvnia’s value felt down due to “a special speculative operations planned at the currency market of Ukraine, and organized with the assistance of the National Bank (Central bank) and some other banks of Ukraine”, in particular, Nadra bank.
“The bank that was just bought for 600 million dollars, received from the National Bank financial resources of 7 billion 100 million hryvnias”, Yulia Tymoshenko said, adding that “the bribes made up from 3% to 7% of the total amount of financing”. Yulia Tymoshenko pointed out that Ukrainian businessman Dmytro Firtash (owner of the Group DF holding, which is famous also for a scandal around the financial support of the British Conservatives) and the Presidential Secretariat are standing behind the Nadra bank. “They need to tumble the hryvnia’s value to dollar”.
Getting closer. The U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko signed the U.S. – Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership.
The joint U.S. – Ukrainian declaration called a “Charter on Strategic Partnership”, signed in Washington on 19 December, appeals for the expanding of the economic and security ties between two countries, and strengthening of the cooperation in energy, trade and other areas.The document does not have a legally binding status.
The declaration states that the United States intends to open a diplomatic post in the Autonomy Republic of Crimea, a region that is highly influenced by Russia (there are many ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking people with Russian passports), and is hosting Russia's Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol (under a lease agreement until 2017). ”Ukraine welcomes the United States' intention to establish an American diplomatic presence (American presence post) in Simferopol, the capital of Crimea”, said the joint declaration.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack has already said the Crimean diplomatic post would be a small one, dedicated to the organising of cultural events and doing political reporting. Mr. McCormack denied any intentions to provoke Russia by establishment of this post. ”This is about U.S.-Ukraine bilateral relations. If the Russian government chooses to be upset by ... my stating that we're considering opening up… a one-person or two-person American presence post, well, there's not much I can do about that,” he added. Russian officials haven’t made any statements on this point, but analysts are saying that this answer may be given in more sharp position of Moscow in gas-trade dialogue with Ukraine. Minister Ohryzko told reporters the post “probably will be done next year”.
Also Washington promised to help to strengthen the candidacy of Ukraine for NATO membership, which is another painful question for the official Russia. Nevertheless, U.S. would work within the NATO-Ukraine Commission to agree on a plan for training and equipping Ukrainian armed forces. “We plan to undertake a program of enhanced security cooperation intended to increase Ukrainian capabilities and to strengthen Ukraine's candidacy for NATO membership,” the document said.
Washington also promised to help Ukraine with “rehabilitating and modernizing the capacity of Ukraine's gas transit infrastructure”, cooling down Russian dreams to fort a consortium for the exploiting of Ukrainian gas lines.
Fitch Ratings: The credit outlook for the Ukrainian energy and utility sector during 2009 is negative.
The report issued on Thursday 18 December lists the main problems of the Ukrainian energy and utility sector: a funding crisis in the state-controlled power generation sector, downward pressure on regulated tariffs due to a severe recession, restricted access to bank lending and debt capital markets, and continued turmoil at NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine (‘B’/Rating Watch Negative). Fitch expects an economic recession in Ukraine in 2009 to drive down power demand, providing only temporary respite to falling capacity reserve margins.
Fitch expects liquidity and refinancing risk to remain high for the Ukrainian energy and utility sector through most of 2009, as foreign banks and markets remain effectively closed to Ukrainian issuers. Naftogaz will continue to confront major challenges in 2009, including a lack of transparency, potentially insufficient state subsidisation for its loss-making residential business, higher import prices, accumulating gas payables and restricted access to external financing. However, Fitch continues to view Naftogaz as an important strategic asset for the Ukrainian government (Ukraine rated at ‘B+’/Outlook Negative) and factors state support into the company’s rating.
The 2009 credit outlook, entitled "Ukrainian Energy and Utilities – 2009 Outlook”, is available on the agency's public website http://www.fitchratings.com/.
Eternal problem. Russia blocks Ukrainian famine-genocide resolution at the United Nations.
Russia blocked Ukraine-initiated UN resolution claiming Holodomor in the Soviet Union in early 1930s was famine-genocide aimed against Ukrainians, rather than a common tragedy of many nations in the country. “We succeeded to bloc the inclusion of the item into the agenda of the current UN General Assembly,” Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin said on Thursday, 18 December, according to the Russian media.
The Ambassador also added the United States and Great Britain backed the Ukrainian motion, which “ended in nothing.” Mr. Churkin said Russian representatives were active in explaining the history of Holodomor to foreign partners. As a result, nine EU countries did not sign the Ukrainian declaration, although “EU members usually act in a consolidated manner”.
Less than a half of the year ago US dollar cost around 4.8 hryvnias. The Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko declared that the hryvnia’s value felt down due to “a special speculative operations planned at the currency market of Ukraine, and organized with the assistance of the National Bank (Central bank) and some other banks of Ukraine”, in particular, Nadra bank.
“The bank that was just bought for 600 million dollars, received from the National Bank financial resources of 7 billion 100 million hryvnias”, Yulia Tymoshenko said, adding that “the bribes made up from 3% to 7% of the total amount of financing”. Yulia Tymoshenko pointed out that Ukrainian businessman Dmytro Firtash (owner of the Group DF holding, which is famous also for a scandal around the financial support of the British Conservatives) and the Presidential Secretariat are standing behind the Nadra bank. “They need to tumble the hryvnia’s value to dollar”.
Getting closer. The U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko signed the U.S. – Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership.
The joint U.S. – Ukrainian declaration called a “Charter on Strategic Partnership”, signed in Washington on 19 December, appeals for the expanding of the economic and security ties between two countries, and strengthening of the cooperation in energy, trade and other areas.The document does not have a legally binding status.
The declaration states that the United States intends to open a diplomatic post in the Autonomy Republic of Crimea, a region that is highly influenced by Russia (there are many ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking people with Russian passports), and is hosting Russia's Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol (under a lease agreement until 2017). ”Ukraine welcomes the United States' intention to establish an American diplomatic presence (American presence post) in Simferopol, the capital of Crimea”, said the joint declaration.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack has already said the Crimean diplomatic post would be a small one, dedicated to the organising of cultural events and doing political reporting. Mr. McCormack denied any intentions to provoke Russia by establishment of this post. ”This is about U.S.-Ukraine bilateral relations. If the Russian government chooses to be upset by ... my stating that we're considering opening up… a one-person or two-person American presence post, well, there's not much I can do about that,” he added. Russian officials haven’t made any statements on this point, but analysts are saying that this answer may be given in more sharp position of Moscow in gas-trade dialogue with Ukraine. Minister Ohryzko told reporters the post “probably will be done next year”.
Also Washington promised to help to strengthen the candidacy of Ukraine for NATO membership, which is another painful question for the official Russia. Nevertheless, U.S. would work within the NATO-Ukraine Commission to agree on a plan for training and equipping Ukrainian armed forces. “We plan to undertake a program of enhanced security cooperation intended to increase Ukrainian capabilities and to strengthen Ukraine's candidacy for NATO membership,” the document said.
Washington also promised to help Ukraine with “rehabilitating and modernizing the capacity of Ukraine's gas transit infrastructure”, cooling down Russian dreams to fort a consortium for the exploiting of Ukrainian gas lines.
Fitch Ratings: The credit outlook for the Ukrainian energy and utility sector during 2009 is negative.
The report issued on Thursday 18 December lists the main problems of the Ukrainian energy and utility sector: a funding crisis in the state-controlled power generation sector, downward pressure on regulated tariffs due to a severe recession, restricted access to bank lending and debt capital markets, and continued turmoil at NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine (‘B’/Rating Watch Negative). Fitch expects an economic recession in Ukraine in 2009 to drive down power demand, providing only temporary respite to falling capacity reserve margins.
Fitch expects liquidity and refinancing risk to remain high for the Ukrainian energy and utility sector through most of 2009, as foreign banks and markets remain effectively closed to Ukrainian issuers. Naftogaz will continue to confront major challenges in 2009, including a lack of transparency, potentially insufficient state subsidisation for its loss-making residential business, higher import prices, accumulating gas payables and restricted access to external financing. However, Fitch continues to view Naftogaz as an important strategic asset for the Ukrainian government (Ukraine rated at ‘B+’/Outlook Negative) and factors state support into the company’s rating.
The 2009 credit outlook, entitled "Ukrainian Energy and Utilities – 2009 Outlook”, is available on the agency's public website http://www.fitchratings.com/.
Eternal problem. Russia blocks Ukrainian famine-genocide resolution at the United Nations.
Russia blocked Ukraine-initiated UN resolution claiming Holodomor in the Soviet Union in early 1930s was famine-genocide aimed against Ukrainians, rather than a common tragedy of many nations in the country. “We succeeded to bloc the inclusion of the item into the agenda of the current UN General Assembly,” Russian Ambassador to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin said on Thursday, 18 December, according to the Russian media.
The Ambassador also added the United States and Great Britain backed the Ukrainian motion, which “ended in nothing.” Mr. Churkin said Russian representatives were active in explaining the history of Holodomor to foreign partners. As a result, nine EU countries did not sign the Ukrainian declaration, although “EU members usually act in a consolidated manner”.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Total opposition. All the main political players and institutions in Ukraine are in opposition to each other.
Starting from the middle of last week, the Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko was moving step by step to the point of no return in her relationship with the President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko, making rougher and rougher statements. On Saturday, 20 December she reached this point. Mrs. Tymoshenko publicly declared she is in opposition to President and wishes him to resign immediately, called him a thief, accused him in the fall of a national currency rate, and said she is sorry for helping him to become President in 2004.
“I don’t want to be a member of such a governing team, and that’s why I’m clearly declaring that I am in opposition to such an authorities like the President of Ukraine, Head of the National Bank of Ukraine, and all the criminal group that surrounds them”, Prime Minister said during the press briefing. “I am very sorry that this person, I’m talking about President Yushchenko, in favour of whom I was standing on all the maydans (squares. – T.V.), agitating and convincing people for him as an honest and moral politician, and now he went down to such a level, when it is shameful even to say his name”.
Viktor Yushchenko will answer to Mrs. Tymoshenko today at 8 PM of Kyiv time, at the weekly news show on Inter TV channel. But the press service of President has already quoted his interview. Mr. Yushchenko says that the last statements of PM Yulia Tymoshenko put her “in the opposition to Ukrainian people and the country”.
“Today the problem is not in my relationship with this lady”, President says. “She declared the opposition to the nation, to the country”. Viktor Yushchenko is sure that Prime Minister just wants to escape from the responsibility for her actions as a Head of Government.
“The situation is obviously out of control of Prime Minister for a long time”, Mr. Yushchenko emphasized. “But today the moment of responsibility is coming close. Who will be responsible for the inflation of 22%? External crisis? Our crisis is sitting on Grushevskogo street, 7th floor, in the office of Prime Minister”.
The central bank attacked back the Government two days before, stating that “the government's inept policies in running the economy... led to a situation in December in which the country could find itself in the internal default”. “The Government now has no funds to pay salaries, pensions and social benefits or to cover its domestic and external obligations”, the National Bank of Ukraine informed.
So, today the Prime Minister of Ukraine is in opposition to the President of Ukraine and to the National Bank of Ukraine. The President of Ukraine is in opposition to Prime Minister. The National Bank is also acting like a political body, declaring its non-support of the Government and its policies. Official opposition – the Party of Regions – is declaring it is against all the powers mentioned above, and is waiting for spring to come to power after the fail of the “Orange leaders”. The new-elected Speaker of the Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn is claiming for neutrality, but in fact is in opposition to everyone who is interested in the snap parliamentary election, which would take the high post in Parliament off from him.
“I don’t want to be a member of such a governing team, and that’s why I’m clearly declaring that I am in opposition to such an authorities like the President of Ukraine, Head of the National Bank of Ukraine, and all the criminal group that surrounds them”, Prime Minister said during the press briefing. “I am very sorry that this person, I’m talking about President Yushchenko, in favour of whom I was standing on all the maydans (squares. – T.V.), agitating and convincing people for him as an honest and moral politician, and now he went down to such a level, when it is shameful even to say his name”.
Viktor Yushchenko will answer to Mrs. Tymoshenko today at 8 PM of Kyiv time, at the weekly news show on Inter TV channel. But the press service of President has already quoted his interview. Mr. Yushchenko says that the last statements of PM Yulia Tymoshenko put her “in the opposition to Ukrainian people and the country”.
“Today the problem is not in my relationship with this lady”, President says. “She declared the opposition to the nation, to the country”. Viktor Yushchenko is sure that Prime Minister just wants to escape from the responsibility for her actions as a Head of Government.
“The situation is obviously out of control of Prime Minister for a long time”, Mr. Yushchenko emphasized. “But today the moment of responsibility is coming close. Who will be responsible for the inflation of 22%? External crisis? Our crisis is sitting on Grushevskogo street, 7th floor, in the office of Prime Minister”.
The central bank attacked back the Government two days before, stating that “the government's inept policies in running the economy... led to a situation in December in which the country could find itself in the internal default”. “The Government now has no funds to pay salaries, pensions and social benefits or to cover its domestic and external obligations”, the National Bank of Ukraine informed.
So, today the Prime Minister of Ukraine is in opposition to the President of Ukraine and to the National Bank of Ukraine. The President of Ukraine is in opposition to Prime Minister. The National Bank is also acting like a political body, declaring its non-support of the Government and its policies. Official opposition – the Party of Regions – is declaring it is against all the powers mentioned above, and is waiting for spring to come to power after the fail of the “Orange leaders”. The new-elected Speaker of the Parliament Volodymyr Lytvyn is claiming for neutrality, but in fact is in opposition to everyone who is interested in the snap parliamentary election, which would take the high post in Parliament off from him.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
United Center. The Our Ukraine party of Viktor Yushchenko may unite with the party of Viktor Baloha.
After a split of the Our Ukraine – People Self-Defence (OU-PSD) parliamentary faction into pro-President and pro-Coalition parts, the President’s Office is thinking seriously about what to do next. The Our Ukraine party, which is officially headed by Viktor Yushchenko, seems to be split also, and its members are demoralised and bewildered. In its current state the party cannot serve as a real support for President neither in Parliament, nor during the elections – both parliamentary and presidential. There is a strong need for the Our Ukraine party to be reunited and reshuffled somehow. It seems that President Yushchenko, together with his Secretariat, has already worked out a decision – to unite the Our Ukraine with the United Center (UC) party of Viktor Baloha, the Head of Presidential Secretariat.
It is a fact that Viktor Yushchenko lost his influence on Parliament and its work. Even the part of OU-PSD that didn’t join the Coalition with the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko and the Block of Lytvyn is getting out of Presidential control. The previous Head of the OU-PSD faction, member of Our Ukraine Vyacheslav Kyrylenko resigned from this position. Another old strong supporter and friend of Viktor Yushchenko, New York born Roman Zvarych, declared that he may leave the Our Ukraine party at all. Situation with the regional offices of Our Ukraine is even worse. As member of Our Ukraine Puslan Knyazevych (who signed a Coalition treaty) informed journalists yesterday, the party local managers have lack of finances, and feel like “being thrown out” as the central party leaders hadn’t contacted them for months.
Kseniya Lyapina, member of the Our Ukraine who didn’t join the Coalition, worries about the future of her party. In particular, she shared with journalists the information that some people - on behalf of the United Center - are proposing money to the local representatives of the Our Ukraine party . “We are against unification with the UC”, Mrs. Lyapina emphasized.
The irony is that to unite Our Ukraine with the United Center does not mean to strengthen the “presidential party”. Despite of bright financial opportunities, the UC is very weak, and doesn’t have a visible party structure. The Member of Parliament of Ukraine and member of the United Center party Lesya Orobets have recently said in a live interview at the Radio Liberty that total amount of UC members is about 100-200 people in every region. According to this info, the most optimistic estimation of a current size of the United Center is a bit more than 5000 (five thousand!) members. So, is it the Our Ukraine who is in need of support?
I would suggest that the union of the Our Ukraine and the United Center is an idea and a goal of Viktor Baloha, who is interested in re-gaining a status of the Member of Parliament before the presidential election, using the rests of the rating of Viktor Yushchenko in parliamentary campaign. Just as a leader of the United Center, unknown in regions, Mr. Baloga may not win 3% of votes to pass the electoral barrier, not using so called administrative resource.
The future of the Our Ukraine party may be decided next week, when the party Summit will have place.
It is a fact that Viktor Yushchenko lost his influence on Parliament and its work. Even the part of OU-PSD that didn’t join the Coalition with the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko and the Block of Lytvyn is getting out of Presidential control. The previous Head of the OU-PSD faction, member of Our Ukraine Vyacheslav Kyrylenko resigned from this position. Another old strong supporter and friend of Viktor Yushchenko, New York born Roman Zvarych, declared that he may leave the Our Ukraine party at all. Situation with the regional offices of Our Ukraine is even worse. As member of Our Ukraine Puslan Knyazevych (who signed a Coalition treaty) informed journalists yesterday, the party local managers have lack of finances, and feel like “being thrown out” as the central party leaders hadn’t contacted them for months.
Kseniya Lyapina, member of the Our Ukraine who didn’t join the Coalition, worries about the future of her party. In particular, she shared with journalists the information that some people - on behalf of the United Center - are proposing money to the local representatives of the Our Ukraine party . “We are against unification with the UC”, Mrs. Lyapina emphasized.
The irony is that to unite Our Ukraine with the United Center does not mean to strengthen the “presidential party”. Despite of bright financial opportunities, the UC is very weak, and doesn’t have a visible party structure. The Member of Parliament of Ukraine and member of the United Center party Lesya Orobets have recently said in a live interview at the Radio Liberty that total amount of UC members is about 100-200 people in every region. According to this info, the most optimistic estimation of a current size of the United Center is a bit more than 5000 (five thousand!) members. So, is it the Our Ukraine who is in need of support?
I would suggest that the union of the Our Ukraine and the United Center is an idea and a goal of Viktor Baloha, who is interested in re-gaining a status of the Member of Parliament before the presidential election, using the rests of the rating of Viktor Yushchenko in parliamentary campaign. Just as a leader of the United Center, unknown in regions, Mr. Baloga may not win 3% of votes to pass the electoral barrier, not using so called administrative resource.
The future of the Our Ukraine party may be decided next week, when the party Summit will have place.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
The Coalition of BYT, OU-PSD and BL factions in Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine does exist. But it is not constitutional.
The Coalition Treaty, uniting the parliamentary factions of the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT), the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence (OU-PSD), and the Block of Lytvyn (BL), was triumphantly signed today in Verkhovna Rada. On behalf of the BYT faction the Coalition Treaty was signed by the Head of the faction Ivan Kyrylenko, on behalf of the OU-PSD – as it was promised earlier – by its Deputy Head Borys Tarasyuk, and on behalf of the BL faction – by the faction’s new Head Igor Sharov. The official name of the Coalition – National Development, Stability, and Order.
37 members of OU-PSD signed the document (total size of the Coalition – 213 MPs). The Head of the OU-PSD faction Vyacheslav Kyrylenko declared that he is going to resign from his position, as he doesn’t represent the faction’s majority anymore. “Any agreement with Tymoshenko worth less than the paper she’s putting her signature on, because it will not be realised, and this will be the main problem of the Coalition”, he said. Mr. Kyrylenko also called the new Coalition as “a serious threat for the state”, noticing the “dominating power” of the Communist Party in this Coalition.
But the Communist party role in the recent developments in Parliament (which is obvious) is not actually the biggest problem of a new parliamentary block of factions. The main paradox is that this newly formed Coalition does not correspond with provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine. We may say that there is a declared unity of factions in Parliament, but there is no new Coalition in its legal meaning.
According to the Part 6 of the Article 83 of the Constitution of Ukraine, “a Coalition of deputy factions, consisted of the majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine of the constitutional membership of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, shall be formed”. (Here is the official translation of the Constitution, but I have to notice that in Ukrainian language the coalition-part sounds more clear, emphasizing that the coalition should comprise the majority of MPs). So, according to the Constitution, 226 or more Members of Parliament should form the Coalition.
There is also a decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, adopted in September 2008 (a detailed info in Ukrainian may be read here), which states that “the requirement on the overall number of Members of Parliament of Ukraine, who on the strength of parliamentary factions are forming the Coalition of parliamentary factions, concerns the moment of formation of the Coalition, and all the period of its activity as well”.
37 members of OU-PSD signed the document (total size of the Coalition – 213 MPs). The Head of the OU-PSD faction Vyacheslav Kyrylenko declared that he is going to resign from his position, as he doesn’t represent the faction’s majority anymore. “Any agreement with Tymoshenko worth less than the paper she’s putting her signature on, because it will not be realised, and this will be the main problem of the Coalition”, he said. Mr. Kyrylenko also called the new Coalition as “a serious threat for the state”, noticing the “dominating power” of the Communist Party in this Coalition.
But the Communist party role in the recent developments in Parliament (which is obvious) is not actually the biggest problem of a new parliamentary block of factions. The main paradox is that this newly formed Coalition does not correspond with provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine. We may say that there is a declared unity of factions in Parliament, but there is no new Coalition in its legal meaning.
According to the Part 6 of the Article 83 of the Constitution of Ukraine, “a Coalition of deputy factions, consisted of the majority of Members of Parliament of Ukraine of the constitutional membership of Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, shall be formed”. (Here is the official translation of the Constitution, but I have to notice that in Ukrainian language the coalition-part sounds more clear, emphasizing that the coalition should comprise the majority of MPs). So, according to the Constitution, 226 or more Members of Parliament should form the Coalition.
There is also a decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, adopted in September 2008 (a detailed info in Ukrainian may be read here), which states that “the requirement on the overall number of Members of Parliament of Ukraine, who on the strength of parliamentary factions are forming the Coalition of parliamentary factions, concerns the moment of formation of the Coalition, and all the period of its activity as well”.
Monday, December 15, 2008
34 to 38? The President's part of OU-PSD consists of 34 MPs
Additional info to my previous post: 34 Members of Parliament were present at the OU-PSD faction sitting in President's Secretariat this morning.
Cutting an Orange. Our Ukraine – People Self-Defence (OU-PSD) faction has been divided to pro-presidential and pro-coalitional parts.
While writing the headline of this post, I automatically added to the name of OU-PSD faction the word “presidential”. Then I deleted it as non-correct. The faction, consisting of 72 Members of Parliament, may not be called presidential anymore, despite of the fact of the recent election of Viktor Yushchenko as official Head of the Our Ukraine party. Only about a half of the faction may still be considered as supporters of Mr. Yushchenko as for today.
Not one, but two sittings of OU-PSD faction took place today at 10 AM. First sitting was held in the Secretariat of President (with his participation), and the second – in the building of Parliament. First sitting has agreed that the Parliament should work in the situational-majority-mode, and the second has approved a draft of the Coalition Treaty to unite officially with the Block of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and the Block of Volodymyr Lytvyn.
The OU-PSD is divided in almost 50%-50% proportion.
Not one, but two sittings of OU-PSD faction took place today at 10 AM. First sitting was held in the Secretariat of President (with his participation), and the second – in the building of Parliament. First sitting has agreed that the Parliament should work in the situational-majority-mode, and the second has approved a draft of the Coalition Treaty to unite officially with the Block of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko and the Block of Volodymyr Lytvyn.
The OU-PSD is divided in almost 50%-50% proportion.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Parliamentary cheating – III. Is Yulia Tymoshenko trying to steal the President’s faction?
Just 30 minutes ago the press conference of Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko was finished. First of all, Mrs. Tymoshenko declared that the parliamentary coalition of three factions – the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko (BYT), the Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence (OU-PSD) faction, and the Block of Volodymyr Lytvyn – does exist.
Talking about the coalition PM was operating with the word combination “the majority of OU-PSD faction”. According to parliamentary rules, the majority – not consensus – is making the final decisions inside any faction, emphasizes Yulia Tymoshenko. That means that the BYT will try to save the coalition in any price, even if the strictly pro-presidential part of the OU-PSD faction will be against that. Actually, President may lose his parliamentary faction and his influence in Parliament at all. (The possible consequences are rather predictable – a snap election). Deputy Chief of OU-PSD faction Borys Tarasyuk has already mentioned that he may sign the coalition treaty again, if the Chief of the faction Vyacheslav Kyrylenko will refuse to do it.
One more remark concerns the Blackstone company, hired by the Government for millions of dollars to consult Ukraine on how to spend $16,4 billion credit of the International Monetary Fund. Yulia Tymoshenko mentioned that the company was chosen “according the current legislation” (though nobody heard about such a tender), and that it is “highly estimated by the IMF management”. Also Mrs. Tymoshenko admitted that she did meet the billionaire George Soros in Kiev one month ago, and that he gave her “advices on how to fight the world financial and economic crisis’ consequences”.
Talking about the coalition PM was operating with the word combination “the majority of OU-PSD faction”. According to parliamentary rules, the majority – not consensus – is making the final decisions inside any faction, emphasizes Yulia Tymoshenko. That means that the BYT will try to save the coalition in any price, even if the strictly pro-presidential part of the OU-PSD faction will be against that. Actually, President may lose his parliamentary faction and his influence in Parliament at all. (The possible consequences are rather predictable – a snap election). Deputy Chief of OU-PSD faction Borys Tarasyuk has already mentioned that he may sign the coalition treaty again, if the Chief of the faction Vyacheslav Kyrylenko will refuse to do it.
One more remark concerns the Blackstone company, hired by the Government for millions of dollars to consult Ukraine on how to spend $16,4 billion credit of the International Monetary Fund. Yulia Tymoshenko mentioned that the company was chosen “according the current legislation” (though nobody heard about such a tender), and that it is “highly estimated by the IMF management”. Also Mrs. Tymoshenko admitted that she did meet the billionaire George Soros in Kiev one month ago, and that he gave her “advices on how to fight the world financial and economic crisis’ consequences”.
And here we are. President of Ukraine is against the coalition of his party with Yulia Tymoshenko and Volodymyr Lytvyn factions.
Member of Parliament from pro-Presidential Our Ukraine – People’s Self-Defence (OU-PSD) faction Roman Zvarych unveiled the details of the yesterday’s meeting of OU-PSD faction with President Viktor Yushchenko. The faction was discussing the prospects of the coalition with the Block of Yulia Tymoshenko and the Block of Volodymyr Lytvyn that is said to be formed in the Parliament of Ukraine. In particular, Mr. Zvarych told, “Viktor Yushchenko expressed a deep concern that Our Ukraine party shouldn’t be responsible for this unskilful policy (of the Government. – T.V.) as a part of coalition”. “President gave us to understand that he is against the entry of our faction into this coalition”, Mr. Zvarych added.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
