The Government of the Republic of Armenia

Honorable National Assembly President,
Dear Members of Parliament,

The 2015 State budget bill of the Republic of Armenia is based on the provisions set out in National Assembly-approved government program, as well as in the government-approved medium-term public spending program for 2015-2017.

I have already had the opportunity to state at the joint session of the National Assembly Standing Committees that both the National Assembly-approved government program and the 2015 State budget bill are first of all realistic. According to the estimates, regardless of internal and external economic developments, the commitments assumed under the budget law shall be carried out.

The 2015 State budget has a clear-cut social orientation, evidenced by the fact that nearly half the budget spending consists of social, educational, cultural and healthcare expenditures.

Adequate expenditures have been planned for national defense, public order and national security purposes. In 2015, we will continue to provide financial assistance to the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic.

At the same time, in all areas, we will abide by our slogan to ensure a level playing field and listen to the public’s opinion. We have initiated a variety of activities aimed at improving the business environment building confidence between the government and entrepreneurs.

Not all of the above-stated objectives have been reflected in the budget bill. Nevertheless, the new government’s budget bill outlines a fresh emphasis in economic policy.

We look at the problem from the standpoint of economic prospects rather than from the perspective of everyday benefits. We have sought to give preference long-term benefits, refusing the temptation of quick income. For instance, irrespective of the cost, we will give effect to the proposed amendments to the law on value added tax.

Realistically, it can only be introduced stage-by-stage by spreading the enormous burden of the cost over a period of three years and giving priority to small businesses. We will actively push ahead with the inspection reform.

I have repeatedly voiced my own approach: the fewer checkups are allowed the better. The more coordinated and transparent is the process of inspection, the better it will be for businesses. The more restrictions are imposed on the checkups the better.

It would be hard for us to reflect this in the 2015 budget bill. Nevertheless, relevant conclusions about our policy orientation can be drawn from the draft laws submitted to the National Assembly, as well as from the decisions passed by the Government and the Prime Minister.

As I predicted, those changes proposed during the budget debate supposed a sizeable increase in expenditure. I am grateful to the National Assembly for the respect of my request and the failure to suggest such a high level of public spending as would erroneously imply coping with the huge multitude of the problems accumulated over years.

Even in this case, financial proposals were made to the amount of 164 billion drams, while the sources were mentioned only in exceptional cases. Of course, we carefully discussed all your proposals, and gave detailed explanations where it appeared to be impossible to find financial solutions.

We have been open to changes not only in terms of financial appropriations, but also in terms of the policy rationale. For instance, as far as disability benefits are concerned, following extensive discussions arising from the international experience, we made such decisions as would rule out injustice and provide necessary protection for our citizens.

As a result of the discussions held in the National Assembly, we have increased the revenue side, reduced expenditures, and adopted new spending programs to a total amount of 13.5 billion drams – a twofold increase over the amount of reduced costs. Being continuous and an inert instrument, the State budget cannot be drastically changed at once. It implies amendments, indeed. Nevertheless, as I noted in my previous statement, it should not lose touch with reality.

I think you have been able to notice our aspiration to make amendments in the final draft submitted to you. I hope that my appeal for healthy discussion and debate will get a positive response.

I want to touch on this topic in more detail in this context of a broader political dialogue. I am an advocate of pluralism - open and sincere discussions - and I am sure that we all do the same thing in our country; we are just doing it in different dimensions. However, there is the imperative to distinguish the primary from the secondary. Pluralism should not be placed above everything and criticism should not be an end in itself.

We are facing multifaceted and multi-layer economic developments worldwide, when the degree of uncertainty is higher than ever. We have many opinions and limited resources. Long-standing woes cannot be addressed on the go. We will address them step by step, through cohesive effort. The whole nation must tend to internal unity and strength to defy the challenges coming from the outer world and have the national unity as a guarantee of victory.

I am well aware of what I need to do, and will go straight toward the proposed targets. We know what we will do and will not step down in the face of petty criticism. We will not give in to the winds blowing around, wittingly or unwittingly pouring water on alien mills.

At the same time, we have the ability to listen to others’ opinions. We know that there are urgent issues that must be tackled, and have no easy answers. We have the will to cooperate to that end. The imperative of addressing challenges is more important for us than the political setting.

We are ready for dialogue. Readiness for dialogue, at the same time, does not mean dialogue for the sake of dialogue. Tolerance does not mean imitation or surrender. Dialogue is dialogue – honest and sincere.

Argument implies a sincere discussion of possible consequences in order to accept the most compelling ones. For example, a practice rejected by the international experience cannot be applied only because the opposition wishes so. However, any reasonable suggestion or idea should be discussed and settled. It is important to be honest and sincere in discussion.

Unfortunately, our aspiration to dialogue has not always been successful. I call on our opponents not to look for a subtext in our effective steps to achieve useful results, and cooperate for the benefit of the country, for the sake of clear and tangible results for our citizens.

Citizens are a chief priority to us, and we feel the imperative to address their concerns. We have clear goals, our determination is unshaken. The door is open for cooperation.

Thank you.