Party views clash over Constitutional change

The political parties in Serbia have opposing views on changes to the Constitution, especially when it comes to the issue of regionalization. The Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) and Serb Progressive Party (SNS) are against any changes that would introduce regionalization, while the League of Vojvodina Social Democrats (LSV) believes that it would be a good idea. Party views clash over Constitutional change The question of Constitutional changes was raised recently by President Boris Tadic, and continues to draw contrasting reactions from the parties. DSS official Slobodan Samardzic and SNS deputy leader Aleksandar Vucic told B92 that changes in the Constitution promoting regionalization would cause nothing but problems and was a diversion from real problems. “You are now even addressing it at the level of a debate, which is a waste of time. You know, just because there is a priest in this country who’s so bored that he’s taken to christening goats, doesn’t mean that we have to be bored too,” Samardzic said. “It is like we’ve all gone crazy! We have a million problems—people are hungry, they are hardly making ends meet, pensioners have no money, they can’t buy their grandchildren any chocolate. Then it occurred to him, ‘Oh, let’s change the Constitution,’ because they heard somewhere in Brus or Knjazevac ‘We want our money,’ and we should be handing out more money from here in Belgrade too, not simply devastating the country, not destroying it, just so someone can repair their political rating,” Vucic said. Meanwhile, LSV Vice-President Bojan Kostres believes that Serbia needs to be regionalized. “Vojvodina cannot and should not apologize to other regions because they don’t exist, but help them become established too,” he said. “I will give only one example—when, under the Privatization law, any company that is legally a part of Vojvodina’s territory is privatized, 55 percent of the money from the privatization stays in Vojvodina. But, when the Nis Tobacco Industry was privatized, only five percent of the money stayed in Nis,” Kostres said. “Why did Vojvodina get 55 percent and people in Nis or in the Morava region only get five? That is a question that we have to discuss,” he said. Tadic said in a recent interview that Serbia needed changes to its Constitution to enable decentralization, but also a reduction in the number of MPs. (FoNet archive)

Party views clash over Constitutional change

The question of Constitutional changes was raised recently by President Boris Tadić, and continues to draw contrasting reactions from the parties.

DSS official Slobodan Samardžić and SNS deputy leader Aleksandar Vučić told B92 that changes in the Constitution promoting regionalization would cause nothing but problems and was a diversion from real problems.

“You are now even addressing it at the level of a debate, which is a waste of time. You know, just because there is a priest in this country who’s so bored that he’s taken to christening goats, doesn’t mean that we have to be bored too,” Samardžić said.

“It is like we’ve all gone crazy! We have a million problems—people are hungry, they are hardly making ends meet, pensioners have no money, they can’t buy their grandchildren any chocolate. Then it occurred to him, ‘Oh, let’s change the Constitution,’ because they heard somewhere in Brus or Knjaževac ‘We want our money,’ and we should be handing out more money from here in Belgrade too, not simply devastating the country, not destroying it, just so someone can repair their political rating,” Vučić said.

Meanwhile, LSV Vice-President Bojan Kostreš believes that Serbia needs to be regionalized.

“Vojvodina cannot and should not apologize to other regions because they don’t exist, but help them become established too,” he said.

“I will give only one example—when, under the Privatization law, any company that is legally a part of Vojvodina’s territory is privatized, 55 percent of the money from the privatization stays in Vojvodina. But, when the Niš Tobacco Industry was privatized, only five percent of the money stayed in Niš,” Kostreš said.

“Why did Vojvodina get 55 percent and people in Niš or in the Morava region only get five? That is a question that we have to discuss,” he said.

Tadić said in a recent interview that Serbia needed changes to its Constitution to enable decentralization, but also a reduction in the number of MPs.