– The Prosperous Armenia party was more critical to the appointment of Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan than the Heritage parliamentary opposition party. What is the reason?
– I think that our stance was conscious. Despite the officials who have criticized the CB president in anything in the past and now are saying that he is the father of the Armenian economy, our stance is very clear, which is that the president shall appoint a person in the PM’s position, who is respected by most of the society. The Republican party, which has majority in the parliament, has decided that Tigran Sargsyan is respected by them. It is their decision, and in the framework of the coalition we are ready to work with the PM, who is respected by the RPA. Despite the officials who are saying one thing in different places when talking to people, and another thing in local and international media by praising Tigran Sargsyan to the extent that are exaggerating everything, we are saying that we will work with him and see what will happen. Recently Tigran Sargsyan said that we should struggle not to let disqualified and stupid people govern this country. It is true, but I would suggest him to include the flatterers and political footmen in that list. As flattering and such things are a political category in our reality, it will be very difficult to implement the reformations they want to make. I can’t understand how they can make the flatterers and people who are thinking like footmen understand that in politics they don’t have to flatter. As for those people who are giving place to such flatterers, they should understand that the main traitors are the flatterers. In a word, I think that the stance of the PA is good and honored and we will express our opinion concerning the new PM’s work after a certain time and working with him. As for praising people, it is not our style. Those people, who are doing such things, are speaking totally different things against different people.
– Tigran Sargsyan’s supporters say that it is a good advantage that he is an excellent economist. Isn’t it sufficient to come to certain conclusions?
– Our economy has grown not due to the management of an economic prime minister, but Robert Kocharyan, Andranik Margaryan or Serzh Sargsyan who are politicians. Also we have failed experiences of economist Hrant Bagratyan’s government and the government of technocrats led by Armen Darbinyan. In a word, it is good to be a good economist, but is not sufficient to govern. Anyway, I am saying one more time that let’s work and see what is happening.
– Isn’t the PA concerned of the fact that the LS party, which has only 8 MPs in the parliament, is getting as many portfolios after the election as the PA, which has 25 seats in the parliament?
– Firstly, I don’t think that the LS will have as many portfolios in the government as the PA. Besides that the people know very well the weight and place of political powers in the country and the number of portfolios does not matter so much. However, I believe that the solution of this issue within the coalition will be fair and, what is more important, political.
– Robert Kocharyan used to be the fourth party of the previous coalition. It is not a secret that the PA is considered to be Robert Kocharyan’s political project. Won’t it be difficult for your party to work within the coalition without having Kocharyan’s support?
– The chairman of the PA Gagik Tsarukyan was and now is in good human relations with the former president. As for the other information, it is incorrect political opinions. The PA is a separate political power in the political sector and plays a key role.
– As a former journalist what do you think about the fact that it is along time that the library of the parliament is not receiving a number of opposition newspapers?
– The parliament shall get all the newspapers of the day, and as far as I know the PR department of the parliament is receiving all the newspapers. As for the library, I don’t think it has been ordered by the speaker. I think that it is the consequence of the activities of a parliamentary low-level division. Yes, it is true that some newspapers are violating the media ethics and are deepening the environment of intolerance in the country, however banning those newspapers is not a good solution. The wall of misunderstanding in the society, which the new president spoke about in his speech, must be ruined. And each of us should take a stone out of that wall of intolerance and misunderstanding. There is no other way.