On the occasion of the first 100 days of the Government, we sent questions about the way and model of work in the Banski Dvori to the head of Raiffeisen Bank, Michael Goerg Müller. Here is what he replied.
– How do you evaluate the first 100 days of the Government? Positive, negative? Why?
In Croatia, the problem of the transfer of power has historically been emphasized. After the former opposition takes power, a period begins in which the personnel structure in ministries, state agencies, and public enterprises changes, but the processes, organization, and efficiency of these institutions are not improved. When power changes, most of the people who come to replace experienced public sector organizers have a lower level of operational knowledge and skills. They need a period to acclimatize to the new environment, take over responsibilities, and master the subsystems for which they have taken responsibility. As long as a professional and stable state administration is not formed, which can implement policy changes without personnel upheavals, the adaptation problems in the transfer of power will recur. After the elections, lengthy political negotiations followed. As a result, the deadlines for preparing and adopting significant documents and decisions were shortened. In such circumstances, the Government was focused on fulfilling obligations within the set deadlines while acclimatizing new officials, and there was neither time nor capacity for structural changes in policies.
– What do you think the Government should have done in those 100 days but did not?
Under public pressure, the new ministers in the Government must show initiative. Since they have not yet mastered the processes in their departments during the initial period, they mostly continue the implementation of the previous Government’s policies, with minor corrections in priorities and the dynamics of implementation. The Government’s capacities were focused on preparing the Budget for 2016 and drafting reform documents within the framework of the European Semester. These are technically demanding documents that leave no room for improvisation or for introducing new policies from the programs of the ruling parties. The Government’s reform capacity is narrowed by differences in goals among coalition partners. In the initial period of governance, partners must first align their goals, then analyze the reality of those goals, and only then agree on measures to achieve the agreed goals. Objective difficulties in coalition governments cannot be an excuse for delays in decisions. There was a lack of change in regulations that determine the rights and obligations of local government units, with the aim of abolishing unsustainable municipalities and cities, and reducing the powers of local units that negatively affect the business climate. Additionally, there was a lack of stronger accountability towards interest groups that hinder business operations and limit market functionality. Right at the beginning of its mandate, the Government should have sent a strong message that it is shifting from redistribution issues to issues of competitiveness and strengthening production.
