An interview with Mārtiņš Barkāns, an entrepreneur
After the elections, forming the government was a long and arduous process…
The sequence of events in forming the government was to be expected, given the election results. Before the elections, it was palpable that despite economic growth, there were plenty of people dissatisfied with political developments in the country and the actions of those in power. Evidently, a portion of society has compared Latvia with other countries. Philosophically, we could argue that a large part of humanity's problems stems from comparison alone. Residing within a unified economic zone – the European Union – we see that we are not the wealthiest country, and although we have significantly raised our standard of living, we continue to compare and see that this and that are better in the neighbouring countries, something else is better across the sea, and yet something else is better somewhere else. Step by step, this creates fertile ground for populism. We see a classic problem of populism: there are many ideas on the wave of which one can “get” into parliament, but the ability to rationally lead society for the sake of a common, better future… is non-existent, or has been lost! Hence, the events we have observed in several acts, and it looks like the performance has only just begun.
Once in the Saeima, can a person with the best will and intentions really change anything?
Personalities have always shaped history. A monument has never been built for a collective, but there are monuments to individuals! It is a scene frequently witnessed in collective decision-making institutions (not only the Saeima, but also in shareholders' meetings): people with personal charisma and conviction are capable of achieving results that may contradict the will of the majority. Only thanks to a person's ability to persuade and inspire! This is our country's problem – we lack statesmen and personalities capable of inspiring and “leading” people! Of course, one thing cannot be forgotten – many of the world's dictators were quite charismatic!
Europe – vast, diverse, large. Is everything from European political centres uncritically acceptable and worthy of being heeded?
The European Union was originally created based on free-market ideas and principles. By dismantling borders, we achieve better cooperation. Countries that cooperate will not go to war with each other, which, looking at European history, is very significant. The Hundred Years' War, the Seven Years' War, the Northern Wars and others – all of this has been experienced. European nations have long been known for having different ambitions and “quarrelling among themselves”! A large part of the EU's foundational ideas is based on open borders and cooperation, which to some extent guarantees the security of member states.
The fact that Europe is simultaneously suffering from a desire to “play nanny” is visible. There is no point in talking about the strange construct that is the EU's governing institutions. But, for example, in France, occupational health and safety laws have for decades prevented the rapid development of business, and the French entrepreneur often thinks they live in a well-developed socialist state. We see this in the recent protests (in France), where the “liberalisation” of the system has met with resistance. The internal ideology and philosophy of member states also shape overall EU policy, and socialist ideas fundamentally involve the state taking care of the weak and the less clever; everyone should be given equal opportunities. Principles of humanism are multifaceted, but some components transform into exaggerations in life. Universal human rights and values are an idea nurtured over the last centuries, which the EU stands for. If we compare, I admit that it is more pleasant to stay and live in Europe than in countries where a person as an individual has no rights or significance.
Is the word “politician” used correctly in Latvia? A person decides to engage in political activities, participates in an election campaign for a few months, and ends up in the Saeima or the City Council. Can we immediately call them a politician just because they “are” somewhere?
I think that nowadays, “labels” are attached quite quickly and stars are made out of starlets. This doesn't just happen in politics; it is observable in society as a whole. Who are our experts on sector and social issues? We can discuss the quality of our cultural gurus, whom we place on pedestals and praise. Do we reward a person who is able to step onto a stage and sing somewhat accurately just for that determination, and start considering them a high-class professional? The problem is the lack of a pool (reserves) of talent, as a result of which we receive or make do with what we have. If there were several hundred people who would act based on facts and analysis, both professionally and with conviction and ideas, I think our politics would be much more professional. Currently, listening to political discussions, their content and style do not differ much from the conversations happening in society over a full glass while grilling meat. This shows the level of education and understanding.
Speaking of the forestry sector and education, several opinions on the shortage of professionals have been heard in a short time. Education and professionals. Are there problems in Latvia?
I think the education system has become bureaucratised to the highest degree. In it (the system), rules, concepts, formalities, and written assignments are more important, losing the content and meaning at some point: why we are doing this. In this regard, looking at the upper secondary stage, where attempts were made to introduce changes through “Iespējamā misija” (Mission Possible), creating a new generation of teachers with a different sense of the world and different beliefs, we see that such initiatives should be absolutely supported! If we talk about vocational education, there are differences. For example, lawyers believe that everything is in order in their sector, and we also see that universities “produce” legal specialists of various profiles and calibre. Daily, when encountering people in the food production sector, I see that the availability of knowledge is very limited – for every issue or topic, we have a few specialists who are considered the coryphaei of the industry. Most often, they work in a narrow specialisation or project, or on a topic, developing knowledge, but a step to the left or right can cause them problems. If we look at certain scientific or business sectors, we do not have many educators who understand them deeply and thoroughly (to the root). From the perspective of many industries, finding qualified and well-prepared specialists is a problem! Of course, nowadays, the speed of events in society is so great that it would be reckless and illusory to claim that everything one learns at university, say, by the age of 24, will form a knowledge base for a whole lifetime. A significant goal of the education system should be to teach skills and the desire to learn throughout life, to supplement knowledge, and to understand what is important! Not long ago, at a forum for scientists, an award was presented for a study with the approximate title “Measuring the operating efficiency of solar panels on the roofs of Riga” – it sounds good, high-level science, an experienced person – but to me, it reminded me of a university student's course paper.
Many people, when asked about their relationship with the state, name the main thing: “Just don't interfere!”
When starting operations in the food production sector about 9 years ago, I thought the role and significance of regulatory institutions would be greater. That is certainly the case, but the word “interfere” would not be the right one. I cannot say that we are being interfered with; rather, the problem is the volume of bureaucratic norms and requirements, which is not small! This is a common problem for small entrepreneurs in Latvia. Looking at it formally, we break some regulation or normative act almost every day in various spheres where the state tries to implement regulation. In each of these spheres – taxes, the environment, local government, etc. – there is a heap of regulatory acts, the precise and absolute execution of which is impossible – then we would only be “producing” papers. Prepared, formatted, described papers. This is a fundamental problem of the state. The word “interfere”, which you mentioned, in my opinion, would mean constant “nitpicking” about the execution and verification of these acts and regulations. As far as can be felt, after the economic crisis, a feeling has been created that “we have less on our ice floe”, and ultimately, it is entrepreneurs who fill the state budget. No one else! The principle of policy (which was introduced and updated recently) – explain first, then punish – is better. I would say the situation here has become calmer, more balanced, more reasonable!
What are these many regulatory descriptions for? There is a theory that there is a fear among many responsible people: “If something happens…” What should we fear?
That is part of that philosophy and belief system I spoke about at the beginning of our conversation! The European liberal thought is: to answer to society for what has happened, to shift the responsibility for one's personal choices onto the shoulders of society. Perhaps it is not a correct example, but can neatly filed documents prevent an accident or a breakdown? Will a signature in a logbook for occupational safety training always protect us? At the moment of signing, responsibility, if one can say so, is duplicated or offloaded (passed) to someone else! This, in turn, creates a situation where the many and varied regulations are violated daily, which again makes the desire to break all regulations acceptable. If a person is burdened daily with often absurd and excessive norms, which assume (whose proponents believe) that the person is an idiot who must be told what they can or cannot do, we end up with a society in which all of these things are ignored on principle. Ignored once, twice, a third time… The line is lost between the sense of which things are important and should be observed, and which things are not essential.
Are Abavas vīna dārzi still the furthest north in Europe?
Regarding winemaking activities in the territory of Latvia, three stages should be mentioned. The oldest – the reign of Duke Jacob and his experiments with various things. Glass production, gunpowder… At that time, they also experimented with grape cultivation in Courland. How successful that was – we can already consider that a legend. It must be taken into account that a few centuries ago, the word “wine” was understood with a different sense of taste and culture. The experiments and events of the Duke's time should be viewed in the context of the climate, because there have been warmer and colder periods, and there is a suspicion that as the period known in history as the Little Ice Age set in, the grapes in Courland also froze. (Duke Jacob reigned from 1642 to 1682. The cold periods, which are often called “little ice ages” after Jacob, were around 1770 and around 1850.)
The next period is 1936, when wood was used in the Abava valley for heating in every possible way, and the valley was effectively “free” of trees. Looking at old photographs – most of the shrubs and forests were cut down! While visiting Sabile and hearing stories about the sad economic situation, Kārlis Ulmanis “dropped the idea of planting grapes”. In those years, it was customary not to speak back to the leader; the horticulture specialists from Pūre created the Wine Hill, but one cannot speak of winemaking here because in those days, grapes were considered valuable food berries and were grown in greenhouses. It must be taken into account that upon planting a vine, it takes about four years to reach a harvest. Four years after 1936 – the Soviet occupation, and people forgot to look after the grapes.
The most recent period. Looking at the mentioned historical context, a group of enthusiasts in Sabile restored the grape plantings, which were primarily created from grape varieties selected in Latvia during the Soviet era. Sabile is a special place where the work of local breeders is visible and can be verified in nature.
I would very much like to stand out with something nowadays, but Sabile is not the furthest place in the North of Europe. Grapes are grown in Finland, quite widely in Estonia too, and – right here with us – in Northern Latvia. Of course, in our conditions, every “degree of warmth” helps with grape cultivation.