Not so long ago I ran into a good acquaintance – walking out of hospital in high spirits, because they had recovered. They tell me they brought along the butter from their last morning's breakfast. A Latvian hospital, butter from Poland, which, presumably, had been the cheapest offer. How can that be?

I am the Minister of Agriculture's adviser on local government affairs; short food chains and the organisation of catering in the education system are matters that local authorities themselves deal with quite often in their work. We come up against the very problem you describe on a regular basis, it is a live issue across the whole country – the cheapest offer wins, and the procurement route chosen is not always the one that would deliver the most economically advantageous, shortest supply chain solution. The present government has been in office a little over a year, and our wish is to see local, Latvian produce – butter included – in every institution connected with the public sector and public procurement.

The Ministry of Agriculture is drawing up an informative report, “On improving the school catering system in Latvia”, and the conclusions it contains could certainly be applied elsewhere too. It has to be understood that the contracting authorities – both state institutions and local governments – are the ones who draw up the procurement documentation. On the subject of the quality of procurement, not so long ago sanctioned products turned up in it as well, which in my view is down to inadequate control or carelessness (thoughtlessness); unflattering though that is, it is already history.

The cheapest offer is often seen as a double-edged sword. On the one hand there is the notion that it is compulsory, on the other – the reproach that we are giving preference to producers who are not our own...

The cheapest offer is not compulsory. In my view it is very important to choose the most economically advantageous offer, although that also entails setting criteria for evaluating the offers. When assessing offers, procurement committees unfortunately find it easier to pick the cheapest than to go into the detail and choose the most economically advantageous one – for example, higher quality, local origin, taking into account supply volumes, deadlines and so on. I daresay it is often society itself that demands the cheapest offer be chosen, simply by comparing the figures. Let me stress – we have excellent examples, such as Sigulda municipality, where for many years both local origin and economic advantage have mattered in procurement. Thinking is changing, though it could happen faster.

Might there be a chance here to add some “real green credentials” – namely, that a local product does not have to be transported far?

Precisely! I think those responsible for the procurements in question would do well to know the fine line between the single market, “green procurement” and local interests. Our farmers give the contracting authority a long-term sense of security; that has been proven, and it prompts the sectors concerned to reorient themselves. Catering companies serving educational institutions are giving preference to local products over those originating in other countries, and it is working better and better.

Wishes are one thing, practical delivery another, and the need to strengthen control mechanisms, however little we like them, yet another. Timing is very important, because... if a product is delivered to your school or hospital, it has to be used now or in the very near future. If you refuse it, you have to find a quick, effectively immediate solution, which is not always possible. Of course, you can ask the suppliers for explanations, contracts provide for penalties, which are not always applied. It happens that the contracting authority is not entirely satisfied with the product delivered, but... the people in its care have to be fed and what has been delivered has to be used, because at that particular moment there is no alternative.

Looking at the situation in Latvia's local authorities, we quite often hear that some town or municipality has excellent experience that others could use or take up. It does not happen. Why?

I can only draw on my own experience – people change, and with them perceptions change too. For example, the previous head of the procurement committee, with an excellent grasp of economic advantage, has found a better job and been replaced by someone else whose outlook is different or entirely the opposite – and the process effectively starts all over again. The management's priorities change as well, and continuity is often lacking. I have to say I have never met a local government leader who would say that the town or municipality they lead takes a stand against local produce or greener procurement using what local farmers have to offer. One thing is that this issue has to be discussed systematically and regularly, with reminders that preference should go to local, quality products. As we can see from the situation after the administrative-territorial reform, the models have varied; as the former municipalities merge, the situation is levelling out, but differences remain, and from time to time the question arises of whether the local market is able to supply what is needed in the required quantities. The Sigulda municipality I mentioned earlier has worked actively with local farmers, and other local authorities do so too. There is another well-known problem, or even misfortune – looking at the short term, the easiest route is often the one chosen. If the municipal leadership is committed to supporting local producers, the situation is far simpler.

Adviser to the minister on local government affairs; in exactly what cases does the minister need advice?

In my view, the Ministry of Agriculture in Latvia is like a second Ministry of Defence. If we consider national policy and foreign policy – local governments are the foundation of the state. The work of any ministry is reflected in local government as well, and when we are talking about agriculture, the forestry sector and fisheries policy and the fields that flow from them... everything listed matters in every local authority.

It has to be said that over the years the trend in Latvia has been to place more and more responsibility on local governments, and this situation ought to be assessed seriously – how meaningful it is, how far-sighted, whether the resources match it and so on. We meet the representatives of the Latvian Association of Local and Regional Governments regularly, we have good contact with local government leaders, and we deal with the live issues.

Has the time already come to assess the recent administrative-territorial reform, or do we need to wait a while longer? Recently, still this year, there was a bit of a stir about whether something should be changed again, or merged, or split...

I think we can already draw some conclusions. My daily work is largely bound up with Talsi municipality, so I can also assess developments from a local government point of view. The hoped-for results that the reform might have delivered have not materialised. As for the overall situation in Latvia – I think a certain amount of time has to pass, at least one electoral cycle.

The mistakes were already apparent at the very start of this reform – in how it was organised and how it unfolded. Latvia regained its independence in large part thanks to local government deputies, who gathered in Riga at the Daugava Stadium. The assembly of all Latvia's deputies was held so that the will of the Latvian people would be respected, and that will was clear – Latvia must be free again. The deputies were socially active, leaders of their communities and so on. My view may be to people's liking or not, but as a result of the recent reform we have substantially reduced the number of deputies – and therefore the representation of voters. The country needed not only to “redraw” the map of municipalities but also to create regional, or second-tier, governance. Resident councils are now being actively set up, though it must be stressed that they will never have the powers or the responsibility for the decisions taken that deputies have at present.

In Estonia, for example, around 30 deputies are elected to the Saaremaa municipal council. Why so many? To ensure the representation of local communities and local residents. In Latvia we have chosen a different path, reducing representation and seeking to centralise. Centralisation is not always the best thing for local government. Of course, a great deal depends on the people who lead a local authority and the processes within it.

If we come back to the reform – why was it needed? “Lots of local authorities, lots of leaders – let us cut their number, it will be easier to talk and reach agreement...” One of the biggest risks of the reform was potential peripheries, or their emergence... The risk, if I may put it that way, “was realised”: unfortunately, more than one centre of a former small municipality is now gradually becoming a periphery within another, larger municipality.

Before the previous local elections, in Jelgava, I heard a very oddly phrased desire for political change in the city. Those who supposedly wanted something to change said one had to vote “for whoever, it does not matter”, just not for the current city leadership. “Whoever it may be” is hardly the wording or the aim that characterises a genuine desire for change... Far too often the criticism is not about the work done but about all sorts of side issues.

Some time ago I discussed with Arnis Cimdars, the former head of the Central Election Commission, whether and how the existing electoral system might be changed. We concluded that those who get elected will not want to change anything, because... they have already been elected. Why change anything if I have been elected?

If representatives from several parties are democratically elected to a local authority, it happens that one or two votes are decisive, and in such cases the mayor of the town or municipality often thinks more about the stability of the coalition than about the work to be done; that situation, incidentally, quite often forces particular plans to be changed or cancelled, in the knowledge that some deputies might not like them.

This, again, is a story about short-term thinking: to get anything done you need the mayor's office, to have the mayor's office you need the deputies' support, and to have the deputies' support you have to act in line with their wishes too, because good ideas set out in the manifestos are quite often simply not supported by the other deputies.

In Lithuania, for example, the system for electing city leaders and deputies is different: in that neighbouring country the mayor of a municipality is elected in direct elections for a fixed term. There is a whole set of conditions to be met for a mayor to be removed, but otherwise they are in a more secure position in their actions and in delivering their programme than in Latvia, where the coalition's majority over the opposition is often only a couple of votes.

Unfortunately, I can see that there is currently no readiness to change the electoral system in Latvia. I can see how hard it is, for example, to move forward the question of allowing those living abroad to vote not only for the Riga lists in Saeima elections but for people from their own region.

As for the “for whoever, it does not matter” situation mentioned in your question, only... That is a sign of weakness, not responsible behaviour. Some treat elections lightly, being unable, for instance, to explain their choice. Elections should be treated responsibly, and one should be able to justify one's choice.

Is the information circulating more widely in Latvia about what is happening in local government accurate and precise enough? For example, when we visit or meet colleagues from Daugavpils University, they are very unhappy with how Latvia's second-largest city is portrayed in the public arena. Is a Riga resident's view of the rest of Latvia not overly “Riga-centric” and skewed?

A very good question, and a hard one to answer. We sometimes live in different information “bubbles”, where the information is not always accurate and precise. I daresay that when we work in the municipalities and take the relevant decisions there, we often fail to consider how what is decided and done is perceived outside that municipality or town. Similarly, one could consider what residents of the regions, who travel to the capital less often, think about Riga, Riga City Council or Riga's streets.

My assessment of Daugavpils is many-sided, and at the same time it is Latvia's second-largest city. Daugavpils has people who are very national, patriotic and state-minded. As for the coalition in Daugavpils City Council – the residents have made their choice, local government is a democratic organism that changes, and it is not right to put a “stamp” on a particular local authority, as that way we can take away the chance to choose... Instead of highlighting the good things, a great deal else gets talked about. Daugavpils is developing, there are many positive stories, and if local people take pride in their city and are content, that will benefit the rest of Latvia too.

About Talsi municipality and its problems, which have from time to time been aired more widely, mostly about finances and the neglected peripheries of the large municipality that have no wish to be peripheries at all. Roja has a port and an open-air stage, Valdemārpils, meanwhile, looks calm and quiet, the people of Sabile are not happy with the town's development plans, and the Livonian Coast lives a life of its own. One could go on.

I have always stressed the uniqueness of Talsi municipality; we even have the Talsi skirt as a code of identity, colourful and vivid. The municipality has four towns – Talsi, Valdemārpils, Sabile and Stende, we have the longest unbroken sea border – 95 kilometres, and the municipality has already been through two major administrative-territorial reforms. If we look at the development of neighbouring municipalities – Kuldīga municipality, for instance – Kuldīga is a strong centre, and financial resources too are concentrated more in the municipal centre. Talsi municipality, by contrast, “had a historical need” (which is a good thing) to develop more evenly, including the fact that businesses are not concentrated in one particular place. But! If you “put together” several municipalities without any great increase in funds to launch development with a real push or spurt, there is not really... It is clear that every place, every parish has been looking for opportunities to develop.

In your question you mentioned the Roja open-air stage, which is a magnet for the place, a good example of how to attract people from other parts of Latvia, though it applies more to the summer season. Valdemārpils is not that quiet; the town has its own magnet – Lake Sasmaka – and significant investment in recent years has gone into the sports ground at Valdemārpils Secondary School, which we opened this year and which anyone can use.

What is, and was, the biggest problem in Talsi municipality? Despite the fact that in 2023 personal income tax revenue was better than planned, a “hole” of several million had opened up as this year's budget was being drawn up. The deputies were forced to take painful decisions to stabilise the situation that had arisen. People feel that after the municipal reform there is no more money, optimisation, reorganisation and so on are still going on, and the result is not always what was hoped for. As for the periphery effect you mentioned – we must not think that Kolka, Sabile or Mērsrags are peripheries because they lie on the municipal boundary, but at the same time it is equally wrong to think that all questions are resolved only at the centre. I am a supporter of decentralisation; every community, parish, municipality or town is perfectly viable, and of course the strength of every community matters.

Talsi municipality is varied, and perhaps at times we are very self-critical, but from the outside, or in the eyes of others, we look different (better). This year too we received the LTRK Bronze award as the most business-friendly municipality of 2024. On the subject of governance (the composition of deputies), changes of council chair are a fairly frequent occurrence in the municipality, and that certainly leaves its mark on what happens. The latest change of power, though, was quite unusual – the deputies were conscientious, because the financial situation at the time was disastrous enough; the former municipal leadership, under which the aforementioned budget deficit had arisen, stepped down, and the deputies had a choice – either we act ourselves, or we wait for a “lady or gentleman from Riga” (an administrator appointed in Riga, not elected by the municipality's residents). We decided to act ourselves. The situation has gradually stabilised, the state came to our aid, we received a loan, we have not spent it all and we hope we will not have to.

On the subject of optimisation, in Ogre municipality, for example, they believe an administrator is needed in every parish, maintaining a direct link with the municipal leadership.

I think each municipality can decide what works best, but the administrator must not become a “postman”; by that I mean a situation in which the administrator reports to local people what has been decided in the council and informs the council about what is happening in the parish. The administrator has to be able to be there on the ground and both take decisions and get done what can be done. There is another question – I do not know of a single parish in Latvia without some salaried local government employee. The functions laid down for local government in law have to be performed in every part of our land. There are places in Latvia where maintaining that link has been entrusted to library staff.

Rural librarians usually have an excellent grasp of local events, and of local history research too.

Librarians know the local people, they know where and how they live, what they read, whether you can ask them for stories about the past and so on. Governance models in Latvia vary, and municipalities choose them as they see fit. Talsi municipality has also taken the decision to appoint a single administrator for several parishes. Much depends on the administrator's own capacity for work and personal qualities; we have good examples showing that it can be done.

A short while ago one of the news portals asked how much time has to pass before “crazy” things, or matters raised loudly (sharply), are forgotten. A question about the planned dark rye bread support campaign, which may already have been forgotten. I daresay this project would not have attracted excessive attention had it not coincided with the problems that came to light in the area of reimbursable medicines... People want to draw comparisons, so it should be clear that the Ministry of Agriculture cannot simply go and solve (fund) the pressing problems of the healthcare or culture sectors.

My feelings were similar – if you first read a plea on social media for help by donating towards buying medicines, and that is followed by a story about the rye bread programme... I looked at it and thought – how can a good idea come across as so unacceptable, and in this situation nobody comes out a winner... As you have already said, we cannot use the money earmarked for the rye bread programme for direct assistance anyway, other forms of support have to be found. Once the first emotions had subsided, I concluded that perhaps we should have acted sooner, because such an option, along the lines of the existing milk and fruit programmes, had been discussed for several years. The rye bread programme project did not come together in a month or a few; it is being discussed and has been discussed before. I daresay the timing was not even the point, because the reaction from a certain part of society was fairly predictable.

We have a wide range of rye bread available, dark rye bread is talked about in schools, and last year at the “Sējējs” awards, in the presence of the country's highest officials, a call was made to give this issue greater attention, particularly in educational institutions. Having assessed the situation, a solution was found, and funding was found and allocated to the project. What we planned to do was to go to pre-school institutions and schools and introduce children to the taste, appearance and value of rye bread in the everyday diet. The pilot project would have been added value on top of what nursery staff and teachers are already doing. We can talk emotionally, in the language of figures or in some other way, but we shape eating habits and understanding in nursery and during the school years – when else?

To draw a parallel, I have happened to travel with school-age young people on an excursion around well-known places in Latvia. “Have you been here before?” “No!” As you talk further, you realise that these young people have spent quite a lot of time abroad but know many places in Latvia only from what they have been told. In my view it is very important not to forget local values, local riches – if you do not learn about them in good time, or nobody tells you about them, that can come back to haunt you bitterly later on.

As for the rye bread project, I was convinced it would be something very positive and worthwhile, but... we were not prepared for the coincidence of circumstances described above. A pilot project of this kind will not be taken forward at the moment, but there is a positive side... When the Cabinet of Ministers approved the project, well-known public figures wrote on social media about which dark rye bread they eat, which they take pride in, which they know, which they tend to give as a gift. In its own way, that added value too.