An interview with Sniedze Sproģe, adviser on rural development issues to the Forest Certification Council of Latvia

How have the rules created, composed, and written for local governments by the Saeima and ministries (or society?) changed over almost 30 years?

Regulatory acts have been changed and continue to change, their number has increased, and many are contradictory. There is also a large number of documents that, by imposing various rules on local governments, infringe upon their unique rights. The central authority, by issuing laws in the form of instructions (prescriptions on how to act), interferes in the fundamental matters and essence of local government. Anger is not a good adviser, but when I listen to the statements of various persons in office… A local government is not a state service provision point! In the information space – in the press, on the radio, on TV, and online – there is a lot of talk (talked about not by local government people, but by “outsiders”) about some “services” that local governments should provide, and they are blamed if they do not provide certain “services”… That is not, and has never been, the essence of local government. There is a central authority that thinks about the state and adopts laws that apply to the entire country! Laws are designed as proper recommendations that include the goal to be achieved. Then there are Cabinet of Ministers regulations that set the benchmarks and fundamental matters. How to implement and achieve this – that is the responsibility of every local authority (municipality)!!!! The same applies to finances. If something is devised at the state level and then decided to be carried out or ensured across the entire country, it is also financed from the state budget. Conversely, every local government within its territory thinks for itself about how to improve or change life for the people living in that territory and adopts such binding regulations that improve life specifically for those residing in that local government's territory, and it finances that too! The local government determines the priorities for its residents, no one else! If Cabinet of Ministers regulations are written as an instruction, that might help in a few points or sentences; the rest is burdensome and unenforceable! Yes, it certainly makes life very easy for the controllers! That is not how laws are written, and that is not how one should act! A local government is different precisely because it is elected in a specific territory and is responsible directly for the well-being and interests of the people of that territory!

Before many parliamentary elections, society has been promised that bureaucracy will be reduced. They promise and promise, but do they reduce it… Yet, in the last year, even local government people have been using the peculiar term “normativization of Latvia”…

Bureaucracy is only growing! We are proudly marching in the direction of a police-bureaucratic state, where control institutions are gradually becoming the main ones, and laws are written so it is easier for controllers and inspectors! If everyone acts the same way, it will be easier to control! And it will be easier to say: “You are not acting correctly because it is written like this in the regulatory documents!” In Latvia, as I have already mentioned, there is a observable desire to write down “how something must be done.” Not – “that it must be accomplished,” but – specifically – “how”! And – if it is written “how,” everyone who does it better or differently is punishable! This is a dangerous thing that those who write documents and laws have done to the state – not allowing an elected deputy to be responsible for their work. We allow not the local authority to rule, but those who have invented how one should work in the local authority! Workers and inventors are not one and the same!

How to change or curb this? Or is it a system and…

The Association of Local Governments has worked on these matters for years and years; we have never supported the piles of regulatory documents that are created somewhere! We have always been against it, but – this cannot be curbed! Step by step we are heading towards a high level of centralization, where the most terrible thing is the ideological closeness of this centralization to an authoritarian regime. We observe the joy of people if someone has broken something and this offender is punished! Blood is demanded, and one can feel – someone has tasted blood! What is happening?

In such a situation it is difficult to work because the country is not developing. In ten years, much has changed for the worse – residents have moved closer to the centers or Riga, or – which is worse – have left! Is there some secret goal – to reduce the number of people in the country? Border districts are empty – and here I am not talking about the border with Russia or Belarus – Northern Vidzeme and Southern Kurzeme are also relatively empty... The more remote territories of the country are empty! Remote does not mean bad, backward or…

Is this related solely to legislation?

It is related to an acute inability to see and view the country as a whole! We have no vision for regional development and population! Analyzing the budget formation and seeing how money is purposefully directed to specific cities and regions, we see how the regions are being “finished off.” For the last 20-25 years, rural regions have not been on the priority list! We are to some extent unique in Europe in that the majority of the country's population lives close to the capital. This is not normal! Large projects are supported, large farms, work is done on a large scale, but there must also be small farms, small works, small entrepreneurs. We are losing out in terms of population as well, because a modern farm does not require many employees. Large farms must be strengthened, but – while helping them – one should have seen the need for many small or tiny enterprises to develop. If today we grow rapeseed, corn, and grain, one should not be surprised that there is no one to feed Latvia's schoolchildren. School tenders are often won by the Lithuanians. We are diligently “feeding” the neighbor's economy, but no mechanism has been developed for a local student to eat local products. If we talk about the circular economy (its essence – to use resources located nearby, to develop them, add value, use them and then expand), we have drifted away from it over the years. Instead, for example, Latvia imports packaging materials that cannot be recycled.

Regional reform. We have experienced some. Currently, discussions are about the problems of economically weak districts and about the fact that far from even a small district center, many things are forgotten…

What is an economically weak district?

In a district, there is a local government, a school, a post office, and a few shops. These are all the jobs. Little money comes into the district, and lively entrepreneurship is not happening in the district…

That is a weak district… Why are there no jobs there? That is the question! If the district is larger in square kilometers or hectares – will there be more jobs? If the administration moves further away from people, will be 35 km further away – will jobs be created in this territory? It is not the fault of the local governments that there are no entrepreneurs and jobs in the territory! If we, for example, create one large local government in the country – will entrepreneurship flourish suddenly on the border of Estonia and Lithuania? Will people start living there and leave the Riga area? Economic development does not happen depending on the size of the local government. If there is support for entrepreneurs, if the small ones are helped to develop, and when they have grown, the new ones are helped again – the processes happen! In our country, such a working of economic levers is not observed – it has never been! There is the big one – we give to the big ones, we forget about the small or remote ones! The most modern become even more modern, the big ones get bigger, and those who struggle on their own, some disappear over time! If in a district or parish there is one farmer, and all the land is cultivated by him, it is unlikely that jobs will be created there! Economic weakness is not an argument for local government reform! In any case – merging local governments or “changing sizes” will not promote new jobs and economic development!

We can look at this on the spot. If you go to a larger district or a smaller one – what is new, how many companies or shops have started working just because the district is larger! I cannot name a single district that has started to develop only because it has become larger! But I can name a series of small districts that, on their own initiative, provide state services or subsidize them so that they are available (SRS, Rural Support Service, post, medicine, etc.), so that the territory's residents will not have to go to the center, where in many places one can go by public transport only once a week!

As the number of local governments shrinks, money will be saved!

There are no calculations, but they do say that is the case! The salaries of fourteen deputies together in a district are the size of one or two teachers' salaries. Will a large saving of funds be created if a deputy travels to a center 60-70 km away? If the people of the Ministry of Welfare say: “By creating a large district, social matters will become cheaper,” I ask – how – by traveling further to work – will costs become cheaper? Speaking of post offices – there is no program in the country on how to develop or help in the development of remote places. Post offices are often closed because they do not meet the paid service plan. Paid services are selling various things. These are things that can be bought in shops (soap, slippers, candles, and even magazines and newspapers!). Why is the number of parcels, letters, pensions not important in the post office indicators, but trade? Trade can happen, but that cannot be the criterion for depriving a territory of a state service! The post is a state service! In the post office, you can get a parcel for one or more hours a day, only – when the post office is working. That is why the demand for parcel lockers and private services is growing.

Regarding local government budget money… There is also no money for development for those -teen local governments that pay into the municipal financial equalization fund! The state permits itself not to allocate about 14-17 million to local governments in total, which is provided for in the law, and sets disadvantageous borrowing conditions! Why must we fix state roads and perform other state tasks? A part of the money due to us is taken anyway, and we are told to do things that are under state administration. Taxes are paid by everyone, and no one has determined that in a district where public money support is not available, there is an easier tax policy! Public money is given only in imagined centers or imagined places… Of course, there are friends, comrades, and allies, but development will not happen if we live only and exclusively in a system that is based on friendship and camaraderie.

Friendship/cronyism has existed for 30 years already… But – speaking of what was said – with the proportionate, balanced development of the state and overseeing the state, it is quite sad.

It is sad! We lack a regional, rural, and population policy. If we look at the current map of districts – 119 local governments. I consider that one or the other district is even too large. In many places, power is so far away that – the center is tidy and beautiful, but – what happens a little further away – is not important. Often – local rules forbid using budget money for tidying up or developing the more remote parts of the district. Regarding public matters, in many places, people's living conditions have worsened – roads are not repaired, traffic is various. From Riga, we get to district centers, further – it is as it is… By the way – a number of problems for roads are caused by the unmanaged drainage system, where there are problems with properties and the State Audit Office. A district would have enough money to fix a road section and tidy up the drainage system, but – this system is on private land, where one must not invest! There are problems with understanding and seeing the big picture. Even a large district cannot deal with things that affect or link several local governments. Here, in my opinion, we need a larger – regional – level of local government, but local authority must be as close to the people as possible. Locals must deal with the everyday problems of local people and full stop! Regions must deal with flood prevention, large structures, vocational schools, traffic organization – I can name and name! Regions should have clearly defined broader functions. That cannot be the state administration system, because it is too far. From the state, a part of the functions must also be transferred to the regions! If there were 8-10-14 or… elected regional local governments that would look broader, take care of the region, and use European money... The districts of the Soviet era are too small for this purpose.

You support two-level local governments… Can you explain the cause of the problem – centering, centralization, events around the center and in the center?

It is difficult to say why in Riga (I mean, in the ministries!) or elsewhere they “do not see the field” and the big events. Discussions on these topics do not end with a result. Elected deputies must see the problems of the state, the problems in the regions or districts of the state. This should also be seen in pre-election programs. Unfortunately, even during the pre-election period, candidates rush there and think about the places where many people live, forgetting the smaller villages or more remote places. When I talk with the young politicians who are in the ruling position today, I do not see new trends. Some talk about regional reform, others about administrative-territorial. If you ask – what is meant by that, how people's lives will change, the answers are often empty.

A story “from life.” A lady who lives in Bebrene thinks that it would be worth moving closer to Riga. The only condition: her ancestral home must be moved. Why does the lady want to move? If the Ilūkste district is merged with Daugavpils – she will be far from the center, and no one will care about her. What can a politician give to the lady who says: “Yes, I also think that it is time for you to move… Why would you live there – so far away?” Because the center from a populated place in the district will be further away, they will start calculating – we do not need a post office, a family doctor, a school. The local government must not undertake to perform state functions without financing! If we look at the availability of state services at the local government level – the availability of the State Land Service is insufficient, medical services have moved away, leaving private practice and private medicine (principle of private business – to earn; if there are few people and money is not coming in – why should I – a doctor – work in a sparsely populated territory?), the post office we already mentioned, financial institutions and ATMs are gone, the local government has internet available, people can settle reports to the SRS and the Rural Support Service. Libraries are there! But in larger districts, unfortunately, one often hears: “Why do you need a library there, in the corner of the district, let them drive to the center!”

Several years ago, talking about rural schools and suggesting using at least the 19th-century experience in the countryside (not the methods, but the experience), I received severe condemnation for obscurantism… Are atypical solutions in local governments restricted by the state, or are these other problems? Are the benchmarks suitable and grounded for Latvia?

Problems in the country are similar, whether it be the Riga area or a more remote district. In the Riga area, new schools must be built because the number of people is increasing, the Ministry of Finance forbids borrowing money, very high co-financing is required! It is a state problem if education is considered a priority! There is an opportunity to build, there is an opportunity to adapt buildings, but that requires money! The same situation with kindergartens.

In districts, there is a transport and distance problem. For example, not so long ago, a school was closed on the Lithuanian border. A very nice, lively parish in Zemgale. After the school was closed, the parish is quite empty; there is a good level of agriculture, the fields are cultivated. In the parish, there is a farmer, a large landowner, jobs were in the school, were in the post office; as the school was closed, people started to leave. A little emotional – but “everything is closed”! That is rich Zemgale! As soon as there are problems in infrastructure, people go to live elsewhere! Not so long ago, some minister expressed himself so “poetically” that one should not repair and build roads in the countryside because then the last people will also leave. I think the opposite! On good roads, people will drive back and forth, but in the mud, they will wade through once and will not want to wade through again…

The fact that many travel even 100-150 kilometers to work in Riga, because some roads are in good condition, is not a criterion, because it is still expensive! If the salary is good, maybe, but do many of us have good salaries? The middle-class part in Latvia still has not developed sufficiently!

Utility. How to evaluate?

Efficient spending of money is very topical and has always been so! Utility must be calculated, accounted for, and one must look to the future! Our – the Association of Local Governments' – opinion is that utility must be evaluated and viewed for the country or the region as a whole, one must see the return tomorrow! Everyone responsible for their territory must know their territory, develop it, and have the opportunities to do so. There will be no opportunities to do and create if controllers from approximately 42 controlling institutions occasionally drop by and each from their own perspective expresses themselves about utility... For a local government, the utility of its organized events or investments can be evaluated only by local residents, not by some official or controller! If in some district the residents consider that three libraries and four schools are necessary and are able to justify it, ensure quality, Riga officials and controllers cannot say that it is not useful!