Miodrag Šajatović: The logic of the political-economic algorithm of Prime Minister Plenković

A few days ago, something unusual happened in the Banski Dvori. Prime Minister Andrej Plenković invited the presidents of the largest banks and held a meeting with them. The uniqueness of the meeting held at the Government headquarters, along with photographing the participants before it began, lies in the fact that Prime Minister Plenković avoids the practice of receiving groups of entrepreneurs and managers collectively and publicly in the Banski Dvori.

The exception that confirms the rule occurred after the discovery that 840,000 citizens are using the so-called implicit overdraft and that this practice will have to be regulated differently.

Plenković once vividly said that his radar works flawlessly. It could also be said that his political algorithm works excellently. The ‘algorithm’ recognizes and reports every situation in which he could gain or at least not lose important votes in elections. Thus, in the case of implicit overdrafts. The number of 840,000 users of overdrafts exceeding the allowed limit and the possibility of their dissatisfaction rang alarm bells for the Prime Minister. So much so that he broke the rule and invited a dozen managers to the Government headquarters.

As if elections were tomorrow

For the topic of this column, it is not most important how implicit overdrafts will be regulated. It is more important to notice how focused Andrej Plenković is on maximizing votes in future elections. While leaders of other parties nonchalantly note that they have three years to prepare for the next elections, the president of the HDZ reacts as if elections are in a month.

He deserves recognition for his focus on his priorities. Which could be articulated as a combination of meeting ‘franchise’ obligations to the EU and caring for his electorate. If something is a priority for him, then he pushes it. When he encounters a tough problem, but one that does not have sufficient political weight, he successfully postpones its real resolution.

When it was important for him to submit the proposal for the National Recovery and Resilience Plan to satisfy the criteria for the approval of billions of euros in aid in Brussels, he appointed his special coordinator with a clear message to ministers not to mess around with the usual interdepartmental folklore. The introduction of the euro and Schengen is also a priority for him, and this is known in the state apparatus. So there are not many brave enough to dare to offend the boss.

However, it is interesting to look at the Prime Minister’s stance on the reconstruction of Zagreb after the earthquake. In that case, he did not appoint a special coordinator who would have the ‘credentials’ to push things through the labyrinths of state administration. Everything was left to Minister Darko Horvat. The reason? One should consider the following thesis. Election results in Zagreb show that the HDZ is performing poorly there. Whether it is rebuilt quickly or slowly, the HDZ will not gain many votes. So why make a special effort? But when the question of 840,000 voters in implicit overdrafts arises, there are certainly enough voters to whom it is wise to show that their government cares about them.

Where it is tough, one does not go hard. This is confirmed by the absence of serious reforms. When it comes to the judiciary, it is clear that the lawyer-judiciary lobby is a tough nut to crack. Reforms in healthcare are not pursued due to the strong medical lobby, but also the awareness that patient-voters could be further irritated. Hot potatoes are only taken when it is clear that the possible damage to voter sentiment could be unpleasant. Here is the example of Agrokor when it threatened a wave of related bankruptcies and even greater defaults, and now managing the covid crisis to keep part of the voters (those in Dalmatia) who are engaged in tourism loyal.

Political opportunism

When it comes to not inviting entrepreneurs and managers to the Banski Dvori, it should be acknowledged that the last one who dared to invite them was Ivica Račan. On several occasions, he organized public meetings with leading entrepreneurs. Since then, prime ministers have avoided this form of communication because, you see, voters could misunderstand it.

And such a kind of courage would be necessary. It is clear that it is politically more opportune to stick to dialogue with entrepreneurial associations. But there should be courage for an additional form of dialogue with, for example, the leaders of the twenty largest business systems in the country.

It is commendable that bankers were invited to the Banski Dvori. But it would have been much better if the reason for their invitation was the topic of how to accelerate GDP growth in cooperation between banks and business, rather than extinguishing the fire of implicit overdrafts. A collective dialogue with the leaders of the most potent business systems could yield results that would be transferred to the incomes of those 840,000 people, so most would not even have to go into an allowed overdraft, let alone an implicit one. But the political algorithm has its logic. 

{embed_digitalno_izdanje}{/embed_digitalno_izdanje}