Σίντνεϊ Σουίνι: Το σχόλιο για το σώμα της που προκάλεσε αντιδράσεις (φωτό)

The recent session of the Macedonian parliament has become a battleground over the budget rebalancing proposal, with opposing views emerging between the ruling coalition and the opposition. The debate centered on whether the proposed changes would address pressing economic challenges or instead exacerbate existing issues such as inflation, living standards, and public debt. The discussion unfolded during an extended parliamentary committee meeting, where both sides presented their arguments based on data and policy goals.

According to the Ministry of Finance’s minister, Goran Dimitrievski-Kochoska, the budget rebalancing for 2026 was driven by the need to align fiscal projections with new economic conditions. She emphasized that the adjustments were necessary to ensure the state could fulfill legal obligations, including regular salary payments in sectors experiencing growth, additional support for agriculture, social protection, and municipalities, as well as accelerating the investment cycle. The revised budget forecasts total revenues of 379.5 billion denars, with tax revenue remaining close to its initial projection of 213.2 billion denars. Non-tax revenues have seen significant improvement, increasing by nearly two billion denars, while donations have also risen.

On the other hand, opposition representatives, particularly Sana Lukareshka from SDSM, criticized the proposal as failing to tackle critical issues facing citizens. She argued that the rebalancing does not address problems related to the standard of living and inflation, which continue to erode purchasing power. Lukareshka pointed out that the document lacks concrete measures to reduce inflation and failed to address concerns about the pension system. She further warned that the so-called "budgetary hole" being presented as development should not be used as an excuse for lack of transparency. Instead, she stressed the importance of clear communication about how these changes affect household budgets.

Bojan Stojanovski, a VMRO-DPMNE representative, defended the rebalancing as a continuation of the government's economic strategy rather than a shift. He argued that the proposal reflects the country's adaptation to real economic movements and highlights efforts to implement projects with developmental impact. According to Stojanovski, the rebalancing includes increased capital expenditures of 5.8 billion denars and development subprograms exceeding 4.2 billion denars. These investments, he claimed, focus on infrastructure such as roads, railways, water supply systems, sewage treatment plants, healthcare facilities, schools, student dorms, sports venues, and environmental protection. He noted that economic indicators show rising incomes and improved implementation of capital expenditures, emphasizing that these figures represent an active economy rather than just numbers on paper.

Mališa Stanakovski, another VMRO-DPMNE representative, echoed similar sentiments, highlighting that the budget rebalancing is part of a broader effort to maintain economic stability. He cited a 5.7% increase in overall revenues, primarily due to higher tax collections, contributions, and non-tax income. Stanakovski also mentioned the reduction in excise duties aimed at mitigating financial shocks caused by the global energy crisis. He pointed out that industries, construction, and agriculture have all shown positive growth trends, contradicting previous opposition claims that economic growth and investment would not materialize. Additionally, he highlighted that pensions have been increased by 1,000 denars following citizen demands, and that a 700 million euro debt inherited from the previous administration has been repaid.

The debate also touched on the broader implications of the budget changes, with some critics arguing that the proposed adjustments risk deepening public debt and creating long-term financial instability. Others, however, viewed the rebalancing as a necessary step toward sustainable economic growth and development. As the discussions continued, the focus remained on balancing immediate fiscal pressures with long-term strategic goals, ensuring that the budget remains transparent, accountable, and aligned with the needs of both the state and its citizens. The outcome of this debate will likely shape the direction of Macedonia’s economic policy in the coming years.