by william g. wagner

Well, as you would expect there is some kind of a shock, but I would like to stress that although I have been in so many places all over the globe, it was when I returned to Slovenia for the first time with my parents way back in 1978… the sense of belonging that I experienced is difficult to describe. No matter where you are, at the end of the day, you feel very deeply about where you belong to… and that sense, that this is "my place", that "this is where I belong to", was present from the first time I stepped as an adult man on this land again, way back in '78.

During the past ten years I have been increasingly visiting Slovenia and engaging myself more and more into the normal life in this Society. Our daughter also moved to Ljubljana seven years ago, and got married here a year and a half ago - and that is quite a landmark in anybody's life.

If you compare with Argentina, I would say that the quality of life in Slovenia is better, although exactly what is better and what is not is sometimes difficult to judge. It is definitely different, although not more than I had expected, and as I said before, I feel extremely comfortable here and feel a sense of belonging. My wife, who is also Slovene, and I decided years ago that we would end up living here.

Well I was always interested in Political life itself. Once you are in the public policy arena, which is where I've been all my life, it is very difficult to step away from it. Way back, ten years ago, when the first democratic government took over in Slovenia, some of the leaders, particularly Mr. Peterle, invited me to come back here immediately and start working in what was called Narodna banka at that time, now known as the Banka Slovenija. I couldn't make up my mind at that time, but definitely the seed was planted and my relationship with some of the politicians in this country continued to develop.

Quite frankly, I think that nothing in your life can really prepare you for these kind of responsibilities, but certainly it did help. The fact that I was an economist and not just in academia, but part of an institution that was working directly with governments on development issues helped a lot because it provided an understanding about banking policy matters, and in that sense I think I am fortunate to have had that experience.

As you know, Slovenia is somewhere in the middle of the transition process now. I think the role of the government is too large, and I don't mean only in terms of the rules that are expected to be established by public policy, but also in terms of the ownership of a large part of the productive structure of the country. Close to 70% is still in governmental hands - of course under different names, funds, and institutions, but at the end of the day, they are not yet in private hands. I definitely believe that the government has to complete the privatization process, but above all has to open up and change its mentality. It is not sufficient to merely tolerate responsible private initiative; you've also got to support it - not with subsidies, but with clear rules of the game that allow each individual to achieve their best.

I believe that Slovenia has to move much faster with privatization, as I already mentioned. My own administration cannot fulfill these things in such a short term. Although we can take some definite steps, and I hope we will do this very soon, in the area of telecommunications. With regard to the banking system, I believe that Slovenia, for it's own survival and future development, needs a kind of banking system that will have what I call a "European profile", which is a strong banking network in private hands that responds to the developmental needs of the country, especially with regard to small businesses and new businesses. I strongly believe that this is possible, but of course with a responsible government that can set up sufficiently clear rules of the game.

Well the main objective of our administration was to work as hard as possible, which is exactly what we did, in the area of preparation for the commitments our country has made with regard to accession into the European Union. Slovenia has experienced some significant delays, such as at the end of last year. And when the political crisis emerged in mid April, the choice was whether to go to an election, or to try to form a government that would take advantage of this period of time, since by the end of September, the European Commission will be looking at our progress. If we would have gone the route of an early election, precious time would have been lost, and that's why we undertook this responsibility.

With regard to our main objective, as we just discussed - the adaptation of our legal system to the European standards, I think that the progress has been remarkable, even though we have lost some time because of the crisis that emerged vis-à-vis the electoral system. About 90% of what we have committed ourselves to do is already being presented to parliament in spite of such problems.

I do not think there is a fair basis for such a statement. With regard to the EU matter, the Slovenian team that is in charge of the negotiation itself was not touched. To the contrary, their say was even strengthened and the whole team has been kept in place. As far as the Secretaries are concerned, Slovenia had, when we came to office, 56 positions - of which 51 were covered. We kept 21 of those and changed the others, but this is absolutely normal. I think the reaction to some of the changes had more to do with the lack of experience in our country of a political "change of guard". It is absolutely normal that a new government will change people in key positions, and that's exactly what happened -there was a change of the guard. Since we are not used to that here, as you may expect, there was a lot of noise about it. But I think that any fair analysis of what has happened will support this view.

Definitely, with regard to the negotiations, Slovenia is in the first group, and everybody knows and understands that, and this is a view shared by the commission itself. So on that score there is no need for concern.

I think the biggest challenge ahead is not in the area of legislation but in adapting our own views to a different kind of environment. We can change the legislation, we can create new institutions - we should be and we are doing that, but we have to make them work - and work according to the objectives and principles upon which they were established. And that requires an adjustment in the political culture, which is neither simple nor easy to achieve. It's not that we just want Slovenia to enter into Europe, we want to recreate Europe in our own land. After centuries of dreaming about the idea, Slovenia has finally achieved its own sovereign state. But the relationship between the citizens and the state is still rather distant, and the sense of ownership is not as deeply grounded as I would expect. The reason has its own historical roots, and change will take time - you can't simply grow into a new system overnight.

I am optimistic. I believe that my own party - the one I helped to create - will see a surprising result. I'm now visiting other parts of the country as often as I can given the responsibilities I have. The level of support I'm seeing gives me a lot of optimism about the future role of our political party in the next parliamentary setup.

The biggest challenge for me has been the relationship with the media. And as I've said, there is nothing that really trains you for a position like this, particularly as I've not until recently been active in the political arena in this country in an open way. I think the problem here is that our journalists have to develop a bigger distance from the political structure itself, and that they have to be much more open to a diversity of views than they have proven to be so far.

Your perception is correct, and no, that's not the case elsewhere. I think we need much more openness and a higher level of professionalism in terms of reporting. The role of the media, its main issue, is to increase the level of the political dialog and raise people's awareness of the issues at hand. So I think we have a lot to learn still. Only an informed citizen can make sound decisions, and for that, he needs to hear both sides of every issue, because there is always at least two sides to every question.