Minister Jakovina needs, above all, to know how to communicate

I am not one of those who will lightly criticize Minister of Agriculture Tihomir Jakovina just for the sake of criticism.

In this country, if something is wrong, politicians are immediately blamed exclusively. However, Minister Jakovina is not without faults either.
First of all, let’s talk a bit about his virtues. One of them is that he is a true miser. But this is indeed a virtue compared to his predecessors Božidar Pankretić and Petar Čobanković, who distributed state money to farmers like drunken billionaires, establishing poor criteria in the process. Tens of billions of kuna have been poured into Croatian agriculture over the last 15 years, and it is interesting that the most was spent recklessly during the HDZ governments. The best illustration of throwing money into the wind are the years in which general elections were held. In those years, farmers were compensated for damages from natural disasters up to ten times more than in years without elections, and all of this was the product of Čobanković (from 2004 to 2007), Pankretić (2007 – 2009), and again Čobanković.

Incentives are an obligation In that context, the stinginess of the current Minister Tihomir Jakovina should be viewed. His predecessors bought voters in the villages with non-selective payments of incentives and compensation for disaster damages, and now that practice has been halted. If nothing else, Minister Jakovina is far better in this regard as he behaves more responsibly in spending money and does not feel the need to pander to farmers to buy them for the next elections.
However, this ‘miser’ has shortcomings that cause Croatian agriculture to continue to stagnate. Farmers demand full payment of incentives, and he cannot do that because there is no money, but at the same time, he makes a mistake when he says: ‘Incentives are not farmers’ salaries, which is why a false image of agricultural producers is created in the public. A smaller portion of producers protests, while the majority honestly does their job.’
It is true that incentives are not salaries, but it is incorrect that a false impression is created in the public about this. This is a very unpleasant statement because it could be concluded that the minister suggests that incentives do not have to be paid because they are not salaries. However, it is unnecessary to say this, as Jakovina knows that incentives are a legal obligation of the state and regardless of what the criteria are and whether there is money or not, farmers have the right to them. Another dangerous claim is that only a few protest, while the others honestly do their job. This implies that those few are doing their job dishonestly and still want the state to give them money.

Chatting with irony I mention this because farmers complain that they find it very difficult to communicate with the minister. Agricultural associations claim that their letters to Minister Jakovina remain unanswered for months, that he is very hard to reach, and that he sometimes behaves arrogantly towards them. I used to ask representatives of farmers when they would present some of their problems what the minister says about it, whether they have contacted him, however, they would only give me an ironic smile, as if to ask me ‘where do you live’.
The minister can say that the representatives of farmers are lying. However, I recently participated in a briefing organized by a domestic company. In our conversation, we touched upon the Ministry of Agriculture. The reaction of my interlocutor, who is not a farmer, was identical to that of the representatives of farmers. With an ironic smile, he stated: ‘I have no one to talk to there. We cannot solve problems on our own, and they neither want to listen nor have a sense of the problem.’ I think Minister Jakovina should work a bit on communication.