Members of the Center are dissatisfied with, among other things, the cancellation of joint decisions already taken in the past.
Last The public controversy over the funding of Veikkaus’ beneficiaries that erupted during the week has led some of the Center Party MPs to question the Prime Minister Sanna Marinin (sd) the Board’s decision-making capacity and the effectiveness of government cooperation.
Underlying this is a controversy over cuts to Veikkaus’ beneficiaries, such as cultural, sports and youth organizations, which the government eventually decided to cancel altogether.
Read more: Prime Minister Marin: The cuts of Veikkaus’ beneficiaries will be canceled 100%
Dissatisfied speeches have now been heard from the ranks of the center regarding, among other things, Marin’s economic policy and the government’s decision-making capacity.
Solution the cancellation of the cuts was expected in itself, but the process leading to the settlement was a complete failure, says, for example, the MP Jouni Ovaska (middle).
“I was left with the impression that the decision was made because of public pressure. There should be clear rules of the game on how these processes work. ”
He also wondered on Twitter on Friday that “how long does Marin’s economic policy still have to last”. The center is on the same government as the demarches, so isn’t that also the center’s economic policy Minister of Finance Annika Saarikon under?
“The comment was related to the reversal of the decisions above all else. The prime minister now used his own prestige to complete the process, and Saarikko was mediated, ”says Ovaska.
Also Congressman Joonas Könttä (center) criticizes the government’s decision-making process as “crooked”, especially considering that the decline in Veikkaus’ funds and the effects of the corona epidemic on the cultural and sports side have long been known.
“The Prime Minister justified the cancellation of the cuts with new information, but at least it has not been clear to me what that new information was,” Könttä says.
On Twitter, he referred to Marin’s meeting of music industry players in Kesäranta as “Finland’s most expensive home party”. According to Köntä, it is not a good thing, in principle, to change decisions that have already been taken because the sector in question is loud.
“After all, quiet and disadvantaged actors do not have similar lobbyists or some influencers behind them, and they are not invited to Kesäranta to celebrate. This is therefore a rather unsustainable road. ”
“
“The prime minister justified the cancellation of the cuts with new information, but at least it has not been clear to me what that new information was.”
Criticism also receives Marin’s absence from the Minister of Science and Culture Antti Kurvisen (central) activities. Marin would have liked Kurvinen not to have held a briefing on financial cuts last Tuesday and tried to get him to cancel the event.
Read more: Kurvinen is pleased with the cancellation of the cuts, but still challenges Marin: “You should not ask the Prime Minister for permission to do so”
Read more: Prime Minister Marin criticizes Kurvi for publishing the cultural cutting list: “This week’s debate has been very damaging”
Könttä wonders why the decisions made together in the spring will be reversed after the minister presents the cuts to the sector.
“The whole gives a pretty confusing picture of the board’s decision-making ability. And it is not a sign of good leadership from Marin that a minister of his own government is directly or indirectly barked, ”says Könttä.
Government cooperation between the center and the sdp, according to the center people interviewed, may continue, but the government does not seem to be on a completely solid footing.
“The only glue for the government is the government program. As long as it is followed, we will be able to move forward, ”says Joonas Könttä.
According to him, what is essential is the ability of the government to act and the trust of the parties in each other. Könttä calls for closer contact between the governing parties.
Jouni Ovaska also believes that the government should have a discussion of the rules of the game. He emphasizes trust and transparency, which are a prerequisite for effective cooperation.
“Even if changes are suddenly made, they are not just announced on Twitter,” Ovaska says.
“This case is perhaps an important reminder that there can no longer be many like-minded people.”
.
