United National Movement refuting mathematical laws02.02.2011 | 21:45
United National Movement has published its financial declaration. According to the presented documents, the party in power received nine-million-dollar revenue last year, mainly due to common citizens' donation. Such zealous support allegedly provided by the electors to the president and his henchmen looks strange. Still greater doubts are caused by definite figures specified in the report. Ideological secretary of the Labour Party Kakha Dzagania and economic expert Soso Tsiskarishvili told GeorgiaTimes whether these figures are close to reality.
According to the financial declaration, UNM received in the aggregate 9,3 million revenue last year, of which the citizens' donation accounted for 7,9 million dollars. That's more or less clear: unlike the expenditure item equaling to 9,4 million dollars. Another 461 thousand dollars was spent by the United National Movement on salaries and 358,3 thousand dollars - on the fulfillment of obligations to the bank.
Business Consulting auditing company, which executing the audit of the party's accounts, asserts that the submitted document fully reflects UNM's financial standing during the previous year. But if we make simple calculations we can easily see that the balance of the party in power has not been drawn up properly. It looks like the party is guided not by mathematical rules but by alchemy formulae if it spends money it never got. The one hundred thousand dollar difference is not a big amount but it makes one inquire about the real financial situation of Mikheil Saakashvili and his supporters.
Kakha Dzagania, ideological secretary of the Labour Party, shared his opinion on the matter with GeorgiaTimes. By the way, there is only 257 thousand dollars on his party's balance. He asserts that the figures specified in the declaration are just the top of the iceberg, while the major sum of money is concealed under water: "The party in power has got 9 million dollars of declared means, which is one tenth of the total revenue. In Georgia, business is conducted only by the officials of the ruling party or those who pay for their entrepreneurship, for the United National Movement lives on racketeering. No businessman will sponsor an oppositional party. Of course, money means a lot but the party in power has got its own administrative resource: police, prisons and television, which helps it to achieve its purposes".
The same viewpoint is shared by economic expert Soso Tsiskarishvili. He says that the money gap between the party in power and other parties is typical of all the countries practicing democratic feudalism and nine million dollars are only one tenth of the amount the United National Movement is accustomed to spend on sponsoring the municipal and mayor's elections to ensure the victory of its candidate.
"This disease is typical for the majority of the post-Soviet countries and I think that United Russia will have similar proportions. Still, the very fact that the oppositional parties have got some figures in their calculations instead of zeros speaks of the heroism and courage of certain businessmen, for it's almost impossible to run business if a businessman has been caught in sympathies for the oppositional forces, especially if they are expressed in money. It looks like political will to admit the citizens' democratic rights won't display itself until a North-African echo reaches Georgia. Any elections in authoritarian countries are a pretext to collect money from the victims of independent business, while for most businessmen, it's important to get some kind of indulgence".
Indeed, the United National Movement has been topping the list of the most sponsored parties for several years but never exceeded the point of ten million dollars. Practically the same strategic research speaks of the "unbiased" state statistics that is subject to certain rules set up by Mikheil Nikolozovitch and his democratic government, which is not a surprising fact in Georgia any more.
Nevertheless, the situation perfectly characterizes the boasted level of the Georgian democracy, which, despite the president and his henchmen's pathetic speeches, has not got beyond the epoch of feudalism.