Otvoriť - EUROREPORT plus

SUMMARYExcerpt from an Interview with theMinister of Finance of the SlovakRepublic, Ivan MiklošSlovakia is the European Unionmember one year already. What arethe advantages and disadvantages ofthe EU membership for Slovakia andwhat is the impact on economy?The impact on economy is positive. Webecame part of large, open and interlinkmarket. Comparative disadvantage of smalleconomy has disappeared. It is one of thereasons of Slovakia’s fast economic growth.Negative aspects concerning the EuropeanUnion entry, e.g. European prices and Slovaksalaries, proved to be unqualified. I can seea negative aspect just in that a favourableinfluence could have been larger if an entireliberalization of labour force movementor liberalization of market with servicesweren’t postponed.What was the influence on publicfinance in first months in the EU?From the viewpoint of public finance it ismore complex as it increases pressure withinit. All we pay for comes from State budgetexpanditures but not everything what theSlovak Republic receives from the EU, comesto State budget income. For the country, it isa credit balance but a debet balance for publicfinance as we have to plan many expanditureswe would not spend otherwise. The matter arethe funds for co-financing primarily.At the end of March the EU adopted thePact on Stability and Economic Growthreform. How do you assess its presentlook from the point of view of Slovakia?We welcome the strenghtening of itspreventive part. On the other hand we canfeel some “incertainty” of repressive part ofthe Pact. Although all the countries declaredthat limits, deficit amounting to three percent of GDP and public debt amountingto maximum sixty per cent of GDP didn’tchange, they itemized further factors whichcan be taken into account at temporaryexceeding these values. Something gotimproved, something did not. In ouropinion, the preceding Pact was not wrongand it brought even results because the EUmember countries were decreasing deficitsunder the Pact pressure. Notwithstanding,many of them did not keep it, perhaps evenbecause it was not enforceable. The questionis whether the rigour but breached Pact isbetter or the less rigour but forceable one.Could the “incertainty” of terms andconditions of the Pact have an influenceon common currency stability?Yes, it may. But I would not overestimateit either. The preceding Pact was a bitunambiguous in its repressive part, but itwas not kept anyway. In the event that therewould not be any progress from the viewpointof fiscal discipline improvement, notablyin such countries as France and Germany,the Eur project could be jeopardized then.It may not happen I assume. Not the Pactbut globalization and tough competitionworld-wide put implementation of utmostimportant and often painful reforms underpressure in the countries. Any governmentcan recognize that if they don’t launch thereforms it will be to the detriment of theireconomies, i.e., manufacturing will leave forother and cheaper countries and they wouldbe less and less competitive.Near future prospectively by 2010exceeds one electoral period. Don’t youthink that priorities would change underaltered ruling Cabinet? Oppositiondeclares a certain concordance in thetargets.I appreciate if opposition is interested insupporting and developing the economy inorder to make it sound. But the Smer partysubmits motions which would lead contraryto other effect. If they want to revise thereforms which are obviously an instrumentof fast economic growth, and to worsenbusiness milieu by it, it can be just the brakesfor economic growth and definitely it wouldn’tcontribute to development of economy.Ireland and Finland are oftenmentioned as models for economydevelopment. Their success is basedon small and medium businesses, veryflexible and inventive ones. What is thechallenge for Slovakia to strenghtena potential of such companies theyoften lack a required starting capital?One of priorities for future are thebusinesses where development of riskcapital and development of capital marketare the key ones. Thanks to reforms we hadalready done we may expect strong andsustainable economic growth without anynecessity of economized baskets which hada very negative impact on small and mediumbusinesses because they are dependenton domestic demand. Economy measureshad always a negative impact on domesticdemand. It doesn’t seem to be a problemanymore I think.You say that tax reform initiated byyou is of success and it proved to bereasonable. Why?Businesses got improved; tax schemestability, transparency and simplicity gotimproved too. Businessmen’s costs gotdecreased and motivation to deal with taxevasion and frauds minimalized. Tax reform isa significant instrument of Slovakia’s positiveintroduction favourable to attract investors.Opposition members criticize youbecause of unbalance between Statebudget income which was put underreform thoroughly and State budgetexpanditure with slight alterationsonly. Three thirds of them obligatoryrelate to liabilities of the State andstate administration course. Are youpreparing any other alterations besidesprogramme budgetaring?It is a continuous procedure. Programmebudgetaring has just begun. It is to becomea pressure tool for minimalizing publicexpenditures. To speak about it is easybut if particular motions in order to alterobligatory expenses in the form of lawsare raised, tastes differ. I assume thatexpanditures may be decreased withina scope of a share in GDP, notably thanksto the fact that gross domestic product maygrow remarkably. Similarily, it was in Irelandwhich had a public expanditure share in GDP50 per cent twenty years ago; nowadays it isamounting to 35 per cent. Decrease did notoccur by minimalizing an absolute amountof expanditures. It was growing slowlierthan gross domestic product. If anyonethinks of decreasing the public expendituresabsolutely, theoretically it’s possible butI cannot imagine a government which wouldmanage it politically.Recently, you made every endeavoursto bind many ministries, e. g. theMinistry of Transport, to economizepublic resources. In this context, theGovernment adopted an analysisof costliness of highways andtook measures how to make roadconstruction cheaper in future. Can wecount on any savings?I cannot tell you precise amount andprovide you with exact figures. But we maysave the funds by developing viable andneeded constructions in order to save money,by avoiding the erection of some deviationroads or viaducts close to highways. We maysave money by shortening the constructionperiod, by shortened procedure of sellingthe lands, preparatory stage for developingfeasibility study, project documentation,working documentation, etc. Third, wemay save more money by creatingcompetitive arena, attracting foreigncompanies from abroad to come.Next, we have to alter rules ofcompetitive bidding in order83SUMMARY