As always, what is not news became current news. So, the mass information agenda included whether or not the opposition would participate in the territorial reform commission or not.
But why was it news?
The news is always, as Alexis Jones beautifully wrote, what is missing:
Does the opposition have any studied, compared, discussed, approved, legitimized platform for what is shamelessly called territorial reform?
It seems like it touched us citizens where it hurts when they discuss whether or not they should participate in the commission!!!
Are you saying that it's not the same whether they participate or not? Are you saying that's the point! That if they didn't participate, they left empty spaces for power!!!
That they can't express their ideas in the media, with the electorate, in plenary sessions of the Assembly, in permanent committees, in congresses, or on the streets as evangelical preachers?
They definitely need to be on the commission for what is shamelessly called territorial reform.
In fact, the opposition is once again giving contradictory messages: On the one hand, it calls for a grand protest on February 4th or 11th, against the government, precisely because it finds no other space in the institutions, on the other hand, it discusses that it should be put on the electoral reform commission. They know it themselves, I don't, but the messages are contradictory, you'd have to be an idiot not to notice.
And then they complain about why they have a people that some of them have started calling "bad", "evil" intellectuals.
A month ago they declared that they would not have any contact, cooperation or dialogue with the government, after that, they discussed going to the commission on what is shamelessly called electoral reform.
There's nothing wrong with them going, but what about the previous statements, not a year ago, but ten days ago.
What changed? Or say, come on, speak up, because no one is listening!!! They are wrong! Even if the electorate doesn't listen carefully, it doesn't take long to hear what interests them. They don't even pay attention to the rest.
The government promises territorial reform, a shameful name if you consider what it should contain.
I don't know if the government knows that the suburban, rural population has emptied the territory worse than before in these years?
Is this related or not to that electoral reform that was supposedly carried out fifteen years ago?
Does anyone in power know why local government heads are under investigation from south to north, or have they been convicted?
Does anyone know anything about the distribution of funds in local government between urbanization in urban centers and investments in rural areas?
Does anyone know how much the rural population, or the suburbs of cities, is represented in local government councils?
Does anyone know if there is independence or autonomy of local government from the prime minister?
Does anyone know what is being done with the roads, water supply, electricity, etc.? Are there studies, is there government data? What about the opposition?
Do the opposition MPs and their leadership know that if they have been in a permanent losing position and in crisis within the party for five or six years, the fundamental reason is precisely the shameless territorial reform?
Do they know that they are immersed in a vicious circle where precisely because of what they shamelessly call territorial reform they produce fewer and fewer deputies, that is, they produce as many deputies as the mayors want, and after coming to the Assembly lost, precisely because of the territorial reform, they discuss in the joint committee on territorial reform, where no one listens to them because they do not constitute a political factor under these conditions?
Do they know or not this vicious circle they are immersed in? Because I don't hear them having an analysis. They play jokes on the opposing party that is making a fuss in the Assembly.
They make what are called oral victories that the devil doesn't even need.
Why is the word "territorial reform" embarrassing?
Because it's not just a matter of dividing borders between villages, between cities. Where does Peqin start, and where does Rrogozhina end, where does Rroskovec start, and where does Lapardhaja start.
The problems are much deeper:
1- What are the rights of citizens in local government?
2- How will the rural and peripheral population be politically represented in local government?
3- What will be the competencies of municipalities to decentralize them?
4- What are the financial resources of local government?
5- Why are there no local referendums?
6- What are the levels and how should they be in local government?
7- How will it be possible for municipalities to not be like the former executive committees that administered the entire district?
8- How will the competencies between municipal councils and mayors be reviewed?
9- How can the miserable, flabby, mediocre state of local media be changed and no longer be the mouthpiece of the municipality?
10- What will be the relationship between central directorates and local government?
11- How will the work of local officials be made transparent?
12- How will it be ensured that employees controlled by the municipality are not the electoral mechanism that controls the electoral balance in the city and district?
13- In what poor condition are the services provided to citizens by municipalities?
14- How will municipal councilors be elected, by list, with what system, who runs, etc.? Or will it be like today when the central government has a monopoly on local government and the democratic party has a monopoly on the opposition in municipalities?
15- What will be the status of the local government employee, or will he continue to resemble a cloth that, after using it to wipe the car windows, you can throw in the first trash can?
16- What is the responsibility of local government for the environment, ecology, fire protection, aesthetics of roads, fences, gardens, facades?
17- What are the rights of citizens who have property, investments in the territory, but are not citizens of that territory?
18- Can someone who lives in Tirana, for example, vote for the local government in Durrës, as in Europe, if there is an investment there, the house of the ancestors, an apartment, or the graves of the ancestors? Let's say in Tropoja, in Saranda? etc.
19- Will an immigrant living in Toronto continue to vote for the municipality of Rroskovec? Or Velabisht?
20- How is it that despite my respect for any particular mayor, how is it that the mayor does not resemble a medieval potentate, an Anatolian mytesarif, a chairman of the proletarian executive committee, a governor, or a person who is simultaneously both mayor, chief architect, and inaugurator of roads and parks, and de facto chairman of the municipal council, and de facto chairman of the party, and head of the electoral campaign, and head of the local media, and the prime minister's main henchman in that territory, and the one who issues building permits, and the chief of the city's aesthetic tastes, and the coach of the football club! Even the one who organizes carnivals in the city, even the one who demolishes unauthorized constructions, even the one who makes the script for the city orchestra's concert in the May 1st parade!
Why are these territorial issues, when municipalities resemble bunkers where you just have to enter, and if you manage to enter, the municipal police look at you angrily, the clerks mock you, and the mayor doesn't even bother to rush into the office through the back door?
If local government is properly autonomous, how is it explained that for as many years as a government has been in power on Martyrs' Boulevard in Tirana, it has also been in power in municipalities?
There are hundreds of problems to be solved. It is enough to call it territorial reform and you understand that it does not seem like it will be just a reform so far!