Lithuanian Businessman Criticizes Frequent Government Changes, Calls for Stability

Lithuania's political landscape is set for another shift as a new coalition agreement has been signed between the social democrats, democrats, and valstiečiai parties. The agreement designates Mindaugas Sinkevičius, the leader of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party, as the nominee for the next prime minister.

However, the process has drawn criticism. Businessman D. Dundulis voiced his reservations about the frequent government changes, describing the situation as "too expensive for the country." He believes that leaders need one to two years to familiarize themselves with governing the national economy, and constant changes prevent any substantial progress.

“

If it were up to me, I would choose from all possible candidates across Lithuania, and select from those possible candidates. I would never try to choose from just one candidate.

Dundulis specifically pointed to the social democratic party's instability, noting this is their "third or fourth attempt" at forming a government. He questioned Sinkevičius's leadership capabilities, stating that while he may be a decent diplomat, his ability to unite the party for effective work remains to be seen.

“

My personal opinion is that, first of all, to lead the country's economy, one needs one to two years to get acquainted. And now the candidate is just finishing getting acquainted with what he has to do, and is already leaving. So realistically, we get nothing.

The businessman also expressed his opinion on President Gitanas Nausėda's role, suggesting that the president appears to be uninvolved in the country's governance. Nausėda had previously urged for changes in the ruling coalition and the removal of Remigijus Žemaitaitis and his party "Nemuno aušra," a decision Nausėda welcomed as timely but acknowledged was late.

Dundulis emphasized that such frequent leadership changes should not be permitted unless there is evidence of criminal activity, arguing that the country suffers from the lack of continuity and consistent policy-making.

“

It seems that the president is not involved in the governance of the state.