Tweet
TAX OFFICIAL - INTERGOVERNMENTAL INDICATOR
Hakob Badalyan
LRAGIR.A.M
11:40:52 - 22/05/2009
The bill on the amendments to the law on inserting a tax service
representative in major enterprises, which has been introduced before
the parliament, aroused the complaint of many of the businessmen
parliamentary members and their friends. The parliamentary session on
May 21 was something like a rebellion of the enterpriser parliamentary
members against the government. The impression was as if the "red
berets" are going to enter in the National Assembly and beat the
parliamentary members, who were dissatisfied with the government, for
breaking the public order. Fortunately, the situation did not arrive to
that point. Where the situation will reach will be seen in the nearest
future: who is going to yield - the government or the enterprisers.
Although, what is already present brings up a lot of questions. For
example, what was the aim of the government to have introduced before
the parliament a bill, which was to arouse the dissatisfaction of the
parliamentary members who are engaged in business? The government could
hardly be unaware of the atmosphere in the parliament. Consequently,
either the government has been forced to present this law by someone,
or the government knows that the bill be adopted anyway, and the
complaints of the parliamentary members are just a false.
But, from where the government may be forced to introduce any
bill before the parliament. Perhaps, the order may be given only
from the residence of the president. Or, whether they forced it
or just advised. They are possible just to have the intention to
check the possibilities of the National Assembly. In other words,
the government was told to introduce the bill before the parliament
if the government will be able to make it adopt let it do that, it
not, let it fail. The residence of the president will come out to
organize a National Assembly-government duel in this case. What is
the need for this duel especially on the eve of the Mayoral election,
when the system needs to be coordinated? Does the principle "divide
and govern" work here?
On the other hand, maybe the bill was so urgent and its introduction
could not be made after the Yerevan Mayoral election. Moreover, it
seems to have right this destiny, as its discussion was interrupted
and was postponed until next week which means that it will be
continued after the Yerevan Mayor election. However, the deposit is
left. Did anyone need it or was it just a misunderstanding? Or maybe
the government tried to check the parliamentary members' mood, the
potentials for their rebellion, the limit, after which their fear
disappears, because the self-preservation instinct comes up. But,
why it was needed just on the eve of the Mayoral election. The
disagreements within the government may cause suspicion within its
lines and may impede them from making the traditional breaches.
There are really many questions. This is a feature of the current
Armenian government. There have been numerous questions during one
year, but there was no concrete answer. The point is that some circle
of the government knows the answers to all the questions, but cannot
let them become the property not only of the public but also a pyramid.
Hakob Badalyan
LRAGIR.A.M
11:40:52 - 22/05/2009
The bill on the amendments to the law on inserting a tax service
representative in major enterprises, which has been introduced before
the parliament, aroused the complaint of many of the businessmen
parliamentary members and their friends. The parliamentary session on
May 21 was something like a rebellion of the enterpriser parliamentary
members against the government. The impression was as if the "red
berets" are going to enter in the National Assembly and beat the
parliamentary members, who were dissatisfied with the government, for
breaking the public order. Fortunately, the situation did not arrive to
that point. Where the situation will reach will be seen in the nearest
future: who is going to yield - the government or the enterprisers.
Although, what is already present brings up a lot of questions. For
example, what was the aim of the government to have introduced before
the parliament a bill, which was to arouse the dissatisfaction of the
parliamentary members who are engaged in business? The government could
hardly be unaware of the atmosphere in the parliament. Consequently,
either the government has been forced to present this law by someone,
or the government knows that the bill be adopted anyway, and the
complaints of the parliamentary members are just a false.
But, from where the government may be forced to introduce any
bill before the parliament. Perhaps, the order may be given only
from the residence of the president. Or, whether they forced it
or just advised. They are possible just to have the intention to
check the possibilities of the National Assembly. In other words,
the government was told to introduce the bill before the parliament
if the government will be able to make it adopt let it do that, it
not, let it fail. The residence of the president will come out to
organize a National Assembly-government duel in this case. What is
the need for this duel especially on the eve of the Mayoral election,
when the system needs to be coordinated? Does the principle "divide
and govern" work here?
On the other hand, maybe the bill was so urgent and its introduction
could not be made after the Yerevan Mayoral election. Moreover, it
seems to have right this destiny, as its discussion was interrupted
and was postponed until next week which means that it will be
continued after the Yerevan Mayor election. However, the deposit is
left. Did anyone need it or was it just a misunderstanding? Or maybe
the government tried to check the parliamentary members' mood, the
potentials for their rebellion, the limit, after which their fear
disappears, because the self-preservation instinct comes up. But,
why it was needed just on the eve of the Mayoral election. The
disagreements within the government may cause suspicion within its
lines and may impede them from making the traditional breaches.
There are really many questions. This is a feature of the current
Armenian government. There have been numerous questions during one
year, but there was no concrete answer. The point is that some circle
of the government knows the answers to all the questions, but cannot
let them become the property not only of the public but also a pyramid.