885096473

POLITICAL

JPRS-EER-91-053 25 ApriI 1991

Parliament failed to pass the bill last Friday. Dlouhy said that at tomorrow’s session of the governmcnt, the Eco-nomics Ministry will put forth new materials which should be the way towards accord.

Dlouhy said that the opinion that the government draft of the bill disqualifies the private farmers has no grounds.

Deputy Claims Land Law Vote Agreed Beforehand

AU1204143991 Prague HOSPODARSKE NOVINY in Czech 9 Apr 91 p 2

[Excerpt] CTK—[passage omitted] Federal Assembly Deputy Vaclav Benda, Christian Democratic Party chairman, stated that representatives of the political parties represented in the parliament agreed that one chamber would vote for the land law’s adoption and the other would vote against it. According to Benda, this was the only way of making surę that the Federal Assembly “did not tum out an imperfect unit—a botched job” and, at the same timc, of making surę that deputies could soon return to the land law. [passage omitted]

Slovak Minister Counters Czech Daily’s Criticism

AU1504153091 Brat islam SMENA in Slomk 11 Apr 91 p 2

[Statement by Slovak Minister of Finance Michał Kovac, madę to SMENA correspondent Kveta Fajcikova when asked to comment on Jiri Leschtina commcntary in 10 April Prague MLADA FRONTA DNES entitled “Bea-vers and Ostriches”]

[Text] In connection with the article in MLADA FRONTA DNES, the question arises of who Mr. Leschtina is and from whom he has information about the course of the session of the Finance Council. The article is filled with invectives and distortions of facts. It is clearly stated in the law on division of powers that the tw'o Republics will avail themselves of generated resources so that they do not have to draw money from the central budget. Temporarily, for the year 1991, the following formula was adopted for dividing total pro-ceeds of the profit and sales taxes: The federal budget will receive 40 percent, the budget of the Czech Republic 35 percent, and the budget of the Slovak Republic 25 percent. Consequently, the budget principles dcviate from the previously adopted principle that the needs of the republics would be financed from their own resources. The crux of the matter is that the author, or rather those who are behind him, are intercstcd in preserving the redistribution of total tax proceeds and, thereby, the opportunity for federal bodies to feed on the resources generated in the two Republics. This approach is paradoxical in that the interests of the Czech Republic are being identified with federal interests. This identity of interests does not apply to Slovakia. I would like to draw attcntion to the fact that when, for example, we demand softer taxcs, we do not want them at the cxpense of the Czech Republic and when we want to extend subsidies diffcrently, we do not want to do so at the expcnse of the Czech Republic either. We want from the federal budget only what we had extended. Ali resources of the federal budget come from the two Republics. We are convinccd that we contribute one-third to federal resources but we are not as convinced that we also receive for the needs of Slovakia one-third of federal services.

Miklosko on VPN Split, Slovak Council Session

AU1204144391 Bratislam YEREJNOST in Slovak 8 Apr 91 p 1

[Interview with Frantisck Miklosko, Slovak National Council chairman, by Juraj Gressner; in Trencianske Teplice on 6 April: ”Divorcc Slovak Style”—First para-graph is VEREJNOST introduction]

[Text] Following Saturday’s [6 April] extraordinary and expanded Public Against Violence [VPN] Slovak Council session in Trencianske Teplice, we interviewed Frantisek Miklosko, one of this movement’s protagonists and founders, who today is Slovak National Council [SNR] chairman.

[Gressner] What is your evaluation of the meeting?

[Miklosko] I was aware of a mood of uncertainty. It secmed to me that every one of us was speaking a differcnt language. Therefore, I do not know how and where we could still find a common language....

[Gressner] Is it necessary, then, for the VPN movement to Split....

[Miklosko] Yes, but in such a way that evcrything is in order; that is, the split should take place before parliament and, in particular, before the voters.

[Gressner] This will be a great shame. After all, we promised ourselves so much following November 1989, especially from the VPN!

[Miklosko] This feeling will be multiplied several times for Slovakia, for the whole of Czechoslovakia.... Especially today when our new constitutions are being drafted. This could have a historical impact.

[Gressner] Where do you—one of the founders of the VPN movement—see the reasons for this ”divorce”?

[Miklosko] It originally appeared to be a dispute betwecn individuals. However, at the moment, it seems to me that socicty has become divided; therefore, the issue is not merely Meciar versus Gal. We are aware of uncertainty, nervousness, aggressiveness, and an inability to maintain a sense of tolerance and patience. There is no force that would succeed in uniting us.

[Gressner] It seems to me that most of all we lack humility and respect for each other....

[Miklosko] Unfortunately, this is truć. Howevcr, I would like to say that I have not ceased to bclieve in our pcople