The recent parliamentary debate on the budget rebalancing has sparked intense discussions among political factions, highlighting deepening divisions over economic priorities and public welfare. The session, which took place during the continuation of a committee meeting, saw heated exchanges between government representatives and opposition members, each presenting contrasting views on the implications of the proposed changes. At the heart of the debate was the question of whether the rebalancing would address pressing national concerns such as inflation, living standards, and fiscal sustainability, or if it merely shifted financial burdens into the future.
According to the minister of finance, Goran Dimitrijevski-Kochoska, the budget rebalancing for 2026 does not stem from a lack of revenue or liquidity issues but rather from the need to align budget projections with new economic conditions. She emphasized that the adjustments aim to ensure additional funds for legal obligations, including regular salary payments in sectors experiencing growth, increased support for agriculture, social protection, and municipalities, as well as efforts to accelerate the investment cycle. The revised total revenues for 2026 are projected at 379.5 billion denars, with tax revenues remaining close to their initial forecast of 213.2 billion denars. Non-tax revenues have seen significant improvement, increasing by nearly two billion denars, while donations have also risen.
In contrast, opposition leaders, particularly Sana Lukareshka from SDSM, criticized the rebalancing as insufficient in addressing immediate challenges faced by citizens. She argued that the measures fail to tackle critical issues such as inflation and the declining standard of living, noting that inflation is eating into wages and that the budget is expanding consumer spending without concrete solutions. Lukareshka pointed out that the document lacks specific measures to reduce inflation and raised concerns about the state of the pension system. She stressed that discussions about deficits and classifications should translate into tangible benefits for families, emphasizing transparency in investments rather than vague promises of development.
Bojan Stojanovski from VMRO-DPMNE offered a more optimistic perspective, asserting that the rebalancing does not represent a shift in economic direction but rather a reinforcement of existing strategies. He highlighted that the document demonstrates how the state is adapting to real economic movements and is focused on implementing projects with developmental impact. According to Stojanovski, capital expenditures are set to increase by 5.8 billion denars, while development subprograms will see an increase of over 4.2 billion denars. These investments are directed towards infrastructure, healthcare, education, sports facilities, and environmental improvements, he explained, arguing that these are not mere expenses but essential steps toward long-term national progress.
Mališa Stanakovski, another VMRO-DPMNE representative, further elaborated on the positive developments in revenue collection. He noted that overall revenues have grown by 5.7% in the first six months of the year, with tax revenues up by 6.3%, contributions by 6.4%, and other non-tax revenues by 12.4%. Stanakovski attributed this growth to measures taken to reduce excise taxes, which helped mitigate the negative effects of the global energy crisis on households. He also cited improved performance in key sectors such as industry, construction, and agriculture, with industrial output rising by 0.8%, construction by 7.2%, services by 3.6%, and agriculture by 2.9%. Additionally, he confirmed that pensions were not only maintained but increased by 1,000 denars following requests from pensioners and citizens.
Stanakovski also highlighted the successful repayment of a 700 million euro debt inherited from previous governments, along with the resolution of a 50 million euro issue related to solidarity taxes. He emphasized that collective agreements were signed with the remaining administrative bodies, contradicting opposition claims that salaries would not rise. Furthermore, he noted that capital investment realization had increased by 53% compared to the previous year, underscoring the government’s commitment to infrastructure development.
As the debate continues, both sides remain entrenched in their positions, with the government defending its approach as necessary for economic stability and development, while the opposition insists that the current strategy fails to meet the urgent needs of the population. The outcome of this discussion will likely shape the trajectory of fiscal policy in the coming years, influencing how resources are allocated and prioritized in the face of ongoing economic and social challenges.
2 servizi
MKD.mkIndipendenteSinistraFattualità 90Obiettività 65l’altro ieri Battaglia parlamentare per il riequilibrio del bilancio, governo parla di sviluppo, opposizione di nuovi debiti e buco di bilancioL'articolo discute il dibattito su una proposta di riequilibrio di bilancio in Macedonia, evidenziando le diverse prospettive tra la coalizione al governo e l'opposizione. L'opposizione, rappresentata da Sana Lukareshka dell'SDSM, critica i cambiamenti proposti, sostenendo che non riescono ad affrontare questioni critiche come l'inflazione, gli standard di vita e le sfide del sistema pensionistico. Sottolinea la necessità di misure concrete per ridurre l'inflazione e migliorare la trasparenza, mettendo in guardia contro l'uso di termini vaghi come "deficit di bilancio" come giustificazione per la spesa opaca. Al contrario, Bojan Stojanoski del VMRO-DPMNE difende il piano di riequilibrio, affermando che riflette la direzione economica piuttosto che un cambiamento, e evidenzia l'aumento degli investimenti di capitale e dei progetti di sviluppo mirati alle infrastrutture e ai servizi pubblici. Sostiene che le proposte sostengono miglioramenti tangibili come strade, ferrovie, ospedali e istruzione, pur non migliorando gli indicatori e le spese economiche in capitale rispetto ai periodi precedenti.
Lettura del bias (Sinistra): L'articolo inquadra il riequilibrio di bilancio come una potenziale minaccia per il benessere pubblico, sottolineando le preoccupazioni sull'inflazione, gli standard di vita e la trasparenza.
Perché questi punteggi (Fattualità 90 · Obiettività 65): The article accurately reports the debate around the budget rebalancing, including quotes from both opposition and ruling party members. It reflects the cross-source consensus that the rebalancing addresses economic adjustments but not core citizen concerns. Objectivity is lower due to the emphasis
MakfaxIndipendenteDestraFattualità 85Obiettività 70l’altro ieri Stankovic: il riequilibrio del bilancio è stato sviluppato, nella parte degli investimenti capitali continueremo a costruire e sviluppare lo statoMališa Stanković, membro della fazione parlamentare VMRO-DPMNE, ha discusso il riequilibrio di bilancio durante una sessione di commissione, sottolineando che il bilancio è stato sviluppato con significativi investimenti di capitale volti allo sviluppo nazionale. Ha sottolineato che il governo ha previsto una crescita economica del 3,8%, un aumento dei finanziamenti per le pensioni, gli stipendi e il sostegno alle aziende, affrontando anche il debito ereditato. Al contrario, l'opposizione ha sostenuto che il bilancio era sottosviluppato e avrebbe portato a ulteriori tagli negli investimenti di capitale. Stanković ha notato una crescita delle entrate del 5,7% in sei mesi, trainata da imposte sul reddito, contributi e altre entrate non fiscali.
Lettura del bias (Destra): L'articolo presenta una difesa dettagliata delle politiche di bilancio del governo da una prospettiva pro-governativa, evidenziando i risultati e giustificando le decisioni prese dal partito al potere.
Perché questi punteggi (Fattualità 85 · Obiettività 70): This article provides detailed information on the budget rebalancing, including specific figures and quotes from Malesa Stanovski. It aligns with the cross-source consensus on the focus on investment and economic growth. Objectivity is slightly better as it presents both sides of the argument more e
★
Manteniamo le notizie oneste.
ObjectiveNews è finanziato dai lettori e senza pubblicità: ti mostriamo il bias invece di nasconderlo. Sostieni il giornalismo indipendente per 5 €/mese.
Diventa sostenitore