Hello. Today, the Government passed the Act on rebuilding,
development and providing financial resources. The proposal
will be presented by the Finance Minister Klemen Boštjančič
and the State Secretary at the Ministry of Natural Resources
Jože Novak. But first, the Minister. -Thank you.
Welcome. I am glad to tell you
that today, the government
passed the proposal for the Act on rebuilding, development
and providing financial resources. The act introduces mechanisms
for faster rebuilding, protection from future disasters
and faster development of affected areas,
which is key.
Today, my explanation of the act will be a little longer,
because it is an extensive issue. As I said yesterday,
it contains 150 articles which cover a very extensive area.
I believe you are interested in it, so I will be longer.
It is key that this proposal was passed
just three months after the biggest natural disaster in Slovenia.
With this, we address
many issues. Help for the citizens,
the economy, building of houses, regulating water ways,
agriculture, protection of the environment, water infrastructure,
administrative processes, public tenders,
protection of cultural heritage, state income,
exemptions from taxes, development,
public publication of the recipients of state funds,
healthcare and social issues.
When talk about help to our citizens,
the proposal introduces a guarantee scheme,
designed to renovate damaged buildings
and provide funds for replacement buildings.
It focuses on remediaton of residential buildings
that housed people with permanent residency,
who actually lived there before the natural disaster.
The guarantee amounts to 100% of the principal amount
of the credit or € 100 000.
Interest rates will be subsidised in full.
The credit has to be insured with a mortgage or insurance policy.
The proposal also includes divestment of municipal properties
to the Housing Fund of Slovenia
which will provide more properties
for non-profit housing building and renovation.
The economy will receive help with a guarantee scheme
that will subsidise interest rate according to the contract
for economy subjects.
This is a financial product, interesting for commercial banks
and borrowers.
The proposed financial instrument has limited effect on public finance,
Because it's a potential liability where financial consequences occur
only on guarantee recalls.
The proposed solution is a step towards guarantee scheme users,
businesses, the self-employed and farmers,
because the banks' network covers the whole area.
The state alleviates the business risk for the banks
and subsidises partial interest rate costs for borrowers.
The Act foresees a measure to encourage investment in the economy,
beneficiaries being he businesses that suffered direct damage in the floods
and the co-financing application has to be handed in by
the end of next year.
The funds will be distributed with a procedure,
defined by the Act on the investment promotion.
These are investments, vital for Slovenian economy.
We're enabling recipients to have a part of their activity
in the added building,
without needing to change the land within the municipality.
The proposal also includes replacement and substitution buildings.
The measures are intended to simplify siting procedures.
Non-threatened areas will see replacement properties
and if the property needs to be moved we foresee some deviation.
If the property is being built on a different location,
we're talking about a substitution property
for a property that is according to the act in need of removal.
The proposal also foresees that the communal fee
for the substituted or replaced property is abolished.
The costs of infrastructure network connection
that include project management and connection construction
will be covered by state funds.
Agriculture, environmental protection and water infrastructure are included
in the remediation plan with forest road repair,
construction of reservoirs for agricultural irrigation,
construction of replacement farmer properties and farms,
repair and construction of water infrastructure,
prioritised application processing for affected citizens,
data access in the AJDA system,
and damage assessment.
The state will also provide guarantee in the agriculture
for the 2024-2025 period.
Administrative procedures will be relieved and sped up
by preparing the documentation on the railroad infrastructure
and in the buffer zone on public roads.
Time limits for bringing an action are also being set.
The proposal also stipulates individual exemptions,
such as cessation of payment of the levy for a deregistered vehicle
if it suffered damage in the natural disaster.
Tenders for property development will see submission of excluded lots
on the areas, hit worst by flooding
where an individual lot cannot exceed the valuation of €1 million.
All such excluded lots of a public tender
cannot exceed 20% of the total public tender value.
The act also stipulates priority requests for review of public procurement contracts
intended to help remediate and alleviate consequences of the floods.
For financing the projects connected to floods and landslides,
a budget fund is formed,
excluded from other budgetary resources.
The sources are:
Tax on the balance sheet total of banks and savings banks
in the amount of 0.2% a year.
The increase of the corporate tax rate by 3%,
and the use of net balance sheet profit of Slovenian State Holding.
These are temporary resources.
The proposal also includes transparency on public funds use.
We've talked a lot about that
proactive public publication of data on used and obtained funds,
funds obtained from donors.
Publication will only be possible on the basis of prior consent,
the submission of which will be possible via the website.
I would also like to remind you that by mid-November,
420 million euros were already paid out from the state budget.
Anyone can see recipients of these funds
at the Ministry of Finance website.
The data will be refreshed once a week.
We will add more detailed lists of recipients
and additional graphics support,
so that these displays will be even more friendly to users
or to those who are interested in this.
With this act, we're also enabling additional co-financing
of mental health programs and psychosocial assistance provision.
Last but not least, as for the development...
The northern part of the third development axis
is designated as a development and priority road infrastructure project,
funds are provided for the co-financing
of public communication networks
and related infrastructure construction.
The construction of high-performance mobile 5G networks is co-financed.
During the construction and reconstruction of damaged
public infrastructure the investors need to lay a sufficiently powerful
empty cable sewage,
which will be available under the same conditions
to all electronic communication networks providers.
Gratuitous easement is being introduced for the construction
of very high performance public communications networks
and related infrastructure on real estate owned by the state
or self-governing local community.
So much for a start.
Mr Novak and I will provide additional clarifications.
I invite the state secretary
at the Ministry of Natural Resources and Spatial Planning Jože Novak,
who will explain what will happen to the houses that were flooded,
replacement constructions and regulation of watercourses.
Please come closer.
Hello.
This part is probably of most interest to people who have been affected.
This group of people is specifically mentioned in the act,
as the minister already explained.
But what are the key things and advantages?
From the data from Ajda,
the group who needed the intervention,
which is coming to an end, and we can begin with reconstruction.
Around 330 affected houses are in a place
where they won't be able to exist anymore.
We will find replacement locations in other places.
There are around 80 buildings that are damaged
to such an extent that they will be reconstructed in the same place.
There are 6000 buildings affected in various ways.
What is key here?
The reconstruction that has begun will continue
without citizens applying anew.
Furthermore, the act automatically stipulates
that building permits which have already been issued
are being extended for an additional period up to five years.
People don't have to worry
because they couldn't build in such conditions.
The state office will help all investors to a great extent.
It will take care of all the most endangered replacement solutions.
It will offer at least an equivalent, if not a better solution.
We can expect different responses to this,
some owners of the endangered buildings
together with the team in the offices,
which are already functioning, are looking for solutions together.
If someone wants to move to an already existing building,
we will buy it and move them into a building in their municipality.
The other option is that someone will request funds, get them,
and won't want to build anymore, such situations are possible.
In cases where we have to find a place for a new house,
the state will build a new house on a building plot.
As the minister said earlier, the plot will be equipped in advance.
We propose that such construction is oriented towards residential areas
already existing in the spatial plans of these municipalities.
This is the first option. The second option is to introduce
the instrument of location verification,
we're expanding significantly from the current legislation,
so that for a few houses on a land, sized up to 3000 m2,
a location process applies to each of them.
This will be arranged in the shortest time possible.
Opinions and consents are applicable for the building permit.
We expect to solve at least a third of construction this way.
With small locations of one, two, three, five houses in some municipalities.
In one municipality, 150 homes need to be replaced,
and 100 in another. Those are both of the Savinja valleys,
where there will be special municipal remedial spatial plans,
that change spatial plans and everything else in the area.
The municipalities have already started doing this
with the State Office and our Ministry.
They are already preparing certain locations
in line with the owner's wishes and the municipality's options.
We have two very important points.
We did not just propose the shortening from 30 days to 15
in order to gain some opinion, consensus or anything else.
We even wrote that if someone does not
submit their opinion in 30 days,
it counts as a submitted presumed opinion,
and each agency should conduct this so we may actually get it done.
As State Secretary at the Ministry of Natural Resources
I have been given the task of weekly coordinating
all consenting parties to provide and align their solutions.
This organisational measure
may even be more important than other provisions,
because, whether we admit it or not, we are a blocked country
where getting permission in exceedingly hard.
That is why construction projects are on hold,
let alone economic or other regional issues.
That is why this measure is important.
We now have a designated contact person at our Ministry
for directing aid to municipalites and submitting opinions
and we have already launched these procedures with the municipalities.
In terms of just intervention measures to make watercourses flow,
we are now starting a complex regulation of these waters.
A special restoration programme will be prepared
and certain watercourses will be fixed sustainably,
so that they may be climate resistant.
The climate changes we are experiencing
will no longer come every 1000 years,
the return period will be very short,
and designers and experts will have to solve this issue.
Another important thing is that the spatial plans that were made
will need to be tested in regard to the water bodies
and their extreme flooding in the areas that were flooded.
Wherever this fails, the plans will need to change
with the judgment of water authorities.
Moreover, we went ahead with alleviating
the work of the water, traffic and other infrastructure
by coordinating projects. We will not wait
for each other's minor things, but we will coordinate projects.
which is significant progress that allows all to work simultaneously.
This work will be organisationally very intense
and will provide results in a very short time.
Thank you. This is a new, very extensive act,
and I believe the journalists have many questions.
Metka Majer, POP TV.
Take, for example, the most affected settlements,
Struge or Letuš,
and the people that lived there and will need to move away.
If they receive replacement construction,
what exactly can we expect from the state?
Could you give us a concrete example for the residents of Struge?
If we combine all the information we have provided today,
per the Intervention Act,
the damage assessments have already been made.
Now they will be done for individual buildings.
Then there is the measure of reimbursing the damage,
which we are already executing
and this month in most cases payments have already been made.
Minister Bratušek held a press conference
where she explained these advance payments in detail.
That was the first part, for the second part, I will say,
that there have been many conversations
and wishes to move have been expressed.
For instance, in Braslovče there is building land being prepared
for 150 new homes.
For most people this is likely the most optimal solution.
Per the wishes of an owner of a damaged home,
the State Technical Office and the municipality
an offer will be made to construct a new home on the same plot of land.
During construction, which may take a about year,
or perhaps less or more in some cases,
as this is a large and demanding project,
substitute housing will be provided
wherever possible and through mutual consent.
Options differ, but the people can also
find something on their own and receive aid
or be offered other solutions with the help of the municipality.
I believe that the State Office, municipality and owner
will in most cases find good solutions together.
What will happen with ownership in Braslovče?
That land is mostly already owned by the state and some others
and the state will try to acquire those plots.
Utilities will be provided and an offer will be made.
The participation of the public
is necessary for the creation of such documents,
as well as the individuals' wishes,
so that the sizes of those homes may be adequately adjusted.
In cases where there is one plot of land or home,
the project documents relate to the person or family
that wishes to receive it, and solutions will be adapted.
Some spatial plans will allow for a so-called "growing house".
Requirements may be such and such right now,
but the spatial plan allows for their expansion.
We have also received several participation offers
from various schools and faculties that could advise in some cases.
I think that this project planning dynamic will yield good results.
We also have the opportunity to design these buildings better.
We have several options in addition to classic concrete construction,
such as wood and others,
which we will discuss with people individually.
For such a large project as these 150 homes,
a project competition is recommended,
which can run in parallel, but it is not mandatory.
We outlined in the Act that project competitions are not necessary.
We do not want to complicate in individual cases,
but for larger projects it is only proper
that an exemplary settlement is made for the future.
A question for the Minister.
You listed the sources for the Solidarity Fund.
How many funds do you expect it will receive in the coming year?
We expect a relatively low amount in the coming year.
The measure of temporarily increasing
the tax on banks and the corporate income tax
will be in effect from 2024 onwards.
This means that the first payments will come in 2025,
except for the advance payment in 2024.
The sources in 2024 will mainly come from borrowing,
so, additional borrowing or rather state loans.
A very important source
will be the expected funds from the EU Solidarity Fund,
which should be received next year in full,
we are hoping that we will receive part of it this year already.
That is all regarding the sources themselves,
but the sources from the tax on banks
and the temporarily increased corporate income tax
amount to a little over 1,5 billion euros.
From 2024 to 2029. And the payment a year later.
In the first years, these funds will mainly be used
to eliminate the consequences of the damage.
You mentioned the EU Solidarity Fund.
I know this is in the domain of the Ministry of Cohesion,
but what is the latest information?
I only know what has already been said,
that this application is being looked at
and for the time being there were no comments from the Commission.
In the end this is generally a political decision.
The EU Solidarity Fund for natural disasters is quite empty.
In the last two years there have been many natural disasters in Europe,
the Slovenian floods were followed by two major disasters.
All of those countries are trying to get the funds.
We're hoping the European Commission will fulfil its promise,
we believe that our application was professionally prepared
and meets all conditions.
The problem is in the resources themselves,
because the resources in this fund are generally too low
for all the disasters that happened in Europe in the last two years.
I know that the Commission is also debating
the provision of additional financing for this fund,
but this is a political debate.
Thank you. We have another question here.
In the meantime, the two journalists online
should raise their hand to ask a question.
Rok Šuligoj, TV Slovenia. A question for the state secretary.
If we understand correctly, the replacement construction
will not have a standardised type of houses.
What will happen in the case... Let me ask this differently.
Will these houses, these apartments be comparable to those
people lost to floods, for example, or from where they had to move?
Will this replacement construction be similar to that
after the Posočje earthquake?
So materials up to a certain price point,
if the owner or customer wants, for example, bigger, better,
they have to pay the difference?
Let me first repeat two terms.
The replacement construction can be built in the same place,
if the building was damaged,
but it can also be built in its vicinity.
We suggest 10, 20 m away, 10 m is now the official proposal.
An additional criterion is the farm or part of the farm that was damaged
can be built on another part of their land
if this is a more suitable place.
I think the planners
will have to come up with better buildings,
better designed, more functional and everything else.
A plan of an individual house will always be created
according to wishes and needs of the owner,
the new needs of the owner,
together with the office which will ensure that this is technically correct
and the municipality which will decide on the location conditions.
I expect we will be able to boast of better, more flexible solutions
than so far.
When one house needs to be moved to another location,
this is one on one in accordance with the municipality's existing conditions.
But when it comes to at least two or three cases
of 100 or 150 houses,
this is a collective matter, and here, above all,
we need to make a good architectural urban design as a whole
with all roads, accesses, sewage and with all equipment
in a safe area where there is no danger of floods or landslides.
Here I also expect an offer that is a little bigger.
The ministry for the housing area has already prepared a call
or the Chamber offered to prepare some architectural proposals
which will be easier to catalogue and recommend to people.
This will also be available.
I think there will be a combination of the owner's desire
and the specific situation
which will lead to significantly better solutions. Why flexible?
Even if today people have a small, less valuable
or a dysfunctional house,
in the first stage we will look for at least an equivalent,
if not a better situation. If this is a young family,
they will have the option to expand at any time.
If they are older people, we will adapt to a new situation.
There are older people in big houses that they don't need,
so that flexibility will be guaranteed.
Thank you. Another one for the minister.
This topic concerns your department.
There will obviously be some financial influence
of yesterday's vote in the National Assembly,
i.e., the harmonisation of social transfers.
I am interested in your comment, view on the decision
and on what happened yesterday. Thank you.
I will give you an answer,
but are we done with questions on the main topic of today's conference,
the reconstruction act? Are there any more questions about that?
Yes, two questions online.
Please answer the question about the new lunch and transport tax.
After this. Andreja Lončar.
Hello.
You mentioned that that the tax on total assets
will start in 2025, if I understood you correctly.
I don't have the draft act here, but I think that
one of the first drafts of the act
stated that it will start in 2024,
there were some explanations
about retroactivity not being applicable here,
there being no risk of retroactivity.
Did you change that later or did I misunderstand?
You understood correctly.
The first version of the act
and communication with the Bank Association and banks
stated that the first period would be 31 December 2023
and the first payment in 2024.
There were several different legal opinions
on this date, 31 December 2023,
regardless of the fact that the act will be passed before that date.
The act will be submitted to the National Assembly today,
under urgent procedure.
Regardless of that, because the legal opinions were different.
There really weren't many that said this was unconstitutional,
but we nevertheless
decided to avoid complications.
We delayed the implementation of this tax by one year.
Thank you. TV Slovenia, Marko Milenkovič.
Just a moment, Marko Milenkovič, we can't hear you.
Our technicians are saying your microphone isn't connected.
Maybe you can write a message to your colleague who is here.
Minister, you can answer the two open topics. Mr Novak, thank you.
Go ahead. The vote in the National Assembly
and possible new tax on lunch and transport.
I was present at yesterday evening's voting in the National Assembly,
I witnessed this strange situation.
As for the voting itself
and complications related to this voting,
I don't have any comments as a representative of the Government.
This is a matter for the National Assembly
which must resolve this in the scope of its work.
I hope this happens as soon as possible,
because what happened
casts a pretty big shadow of doubt
not only over this vote, but also other ones.
This is a prerequisite for believing in democracy in which we live.
This was an unpleasant complication,
I hope the National Assembly will resolve it as soon as possible.
As for the financial impact,
it's hard for me to comment, given that
right now we don't officially know what the vote was.
We will wait for that.
I hope it will be known today, and then I will comment.
New tax on lunch and transport.
Yes, as far as that is concerned,
today one of the printed medias published an article.
The Ministry of Finance strongly rejects innuendos
about supposed solutions
brought about by the so-called renovation of the system.
Exactly such articles as the one published today,
exactly such lobbying attempts of tearing down solutions
I have already spoken about in past media appearances.
Before any solutions are formed or presented to the public,
individual interest groups begin with scaremongering
and distortion of information.
The ministry explained to one of the authors of today's article
that we don't yet have definitive solutions,
therefore we can't discuss them.
When the definitive solutions are formed,
we will first present them to the key stakeholders.
We will do so despite all the pressures
what the solutions should be,
which are already appearing in the media
and suggesting the allowed direction of change.
We also explained that the tax system is complex,
as I keep repeating.
Each intervention has an impact on other areas,
this needs to be considered when looking for solutions.
In fact, this is one of the main problems of the existing tax system,
because it wasn't solved systemically,
but with ad hoc solutions.
Even today there are new ideas on how to solve a problem ad hoc every week,
of course, we're all experts in the field of taxes,
we would all like to solve problems in our field by paying lower taxes
despite the fact that when we talk to anyone who takes enough time,
everyone agrees that the system is unclear
and needs to be set up anew, we need to start from scratch,
but our solution should be introduced before that.
A I said and as we wrote in our answer,
we want solutions that will create a transparent and simple tax system.
It's absolutely clear this is only possible
especially in the field of labour taxation,
exclusively in agreement with the social partners,
both with employers and employees.
Without such an agreement, solutions aren't possible.
Let me say this again, I will stress this out loud,
despite the fact that certain interest groups don't want to hear it.
If we're talking about wage taxation in Slovenia,
let's talk comprehensively and compare apples to apples,
not apples to oranges.
The Slovenian system is specific in the area of labour taxation
and precisely what I said happened in all tax sub-areas
also happened in the area of labour taxation.
Because the labour taxation
and above all the amount of social contributions in Slovenia is high,
especially social contributions related to rights
provided by the state or society.
If we agree to eliminate or reduce some rights,
then I agree social contributions should be reduced as well.
When comparisons are made...
Interest groups love to compare us to one or maybe two countries.
Or there is a comparison,
which we also take into account,
I mean it's an absolutely relevant comparison,
the OECD's comparison of labour taxation,
but it must be said that this comparison
doesn't cover certain specifics of the Slovenian labour taxation.
I'm talking about the reimbursement of transport and lunch costs,
holiday allowance, Christmas bonus.
Because this is specific to Slovenia,
I mean especially allowances for transport and food,
which are not included in OECD's comparisons
and the picture of Slovenia as far as burden on labour goes,
is thus different. We are always highlighting this issue.
But when we start to speak about it,
an article appears somewhere that we are planning to tax subsidy
or transport or food. This is nonsense
and a distortion of facts. As I've said,
we believe this is work of groups which don't want changes
or don't want to reset this system, build it anew
and make it a simple, transparent system that everybody understands.
Rok Šuligoj. Because of technical problems I'm speaking
in the name of my colleague. Expenditure in amount of 10 billion
should be given for renovation after the floods.
Is the expenditure more defined now?
And about simplification of the procedures...
The opposition says that there are too many simplifications
and this enables misuse.
As far as expenditure goes, we have two evaluations
and both were made on their own methodology.
One is an estimate of a direct damage.
It is 3 billion. The estimate of a direct and indirect damage,
renovation of everything that we want to restore,
all the landslides and everything, amounts to 10 billion Euros.
The cost will be probably somewhere between those two numbers.
As a minister I wish this number to be as low as possible.
But again, let me explain the sources and additional taxes.
I told you today, how much the total will cost.
It is clear that the state will finance the biggest part
with additional duty.
And simplifications. -As far as simplifications are concerned,
we have announced this is one of the main goals of this Act.
I am surprised by this critique and not surprised on the other hand.
I'm surprised by the promptness.
Considering that we have confirmed the Act on government today.
It is not public yet, it is not in National Assembly yet,
it will be in the next hour.
I would say that the critics should read the Act first.
On the other hand, we have never been hiding
that one of the main goals of this Act is simplification of procedures.
I wish that solutions from this Act,
which is being bounded to remedy the damage from August...
I absolutely believe that the part of the solutions will be good.
And especially, that it will find its way in the legislation.
Namely, long duration of spatial processes
that Mr. Novak talked about is one of the biggest problems
blocking the development of our country.
Our goal was to find solutions through the disaster.
We found them quickly. And when they will be implemented,
I believe we will find out that it is reasonable to include them
in the organic laws and thus tackle some of the problems
that nobody was bothered with for 30 years.
Thank you. The Act was published by Local Government Association.
Correspondence meeting started today at 9 a.m.
and finished at 12.15. Act couldn't be published,
because it is being confirmed now, as we speak.
Andreja Lončar wanted to ask something.
I have a question about the amendment that was confirmed yesterday.
I know you can't comment it, but Miha Kordiš told us
what the financial effect of the amendment will be. Around 20 million.
As far as I understand it, this wasn't expected spending.
I would like to know, where the money for this shall come from.
Can you take it from the budget margin?
Do you already know, how will you meet the expenses?
If this amendment is going to last.
And as a source to finance the increase in transfers
the excise duties were mentioned. What is going on with this?
When shall we know it?
Does this amendment require a higher increase in duties as was foreseen?
And a system question. Social transfers should be aligned
to the increase in costs and salaries.
But income tax allowance should not.
It is a long term systemic problem.
We have a bad ratio between the transfers and salaries.
Do you see a negative effect here?
As I've said, I don't want to comment decisions,
where we don't have enough data from the National Assembly yet.
I feel this is a very unpleasant complication.
I don't want to say something worse.
Authorities should clarify, what happened yesterday.
As far as coordination of social transfers go
with inflation.
This was a governmental proposal and we have explained it,
to the coalition MPs as well.
As a minister of finance I still advocate this proposal,
even though it is unpopular
and we didn't want to adopt it in the context of high inflation,
but it is one of the measures, needed to lower inflation.
At the same time we have a record low unemployment.
It is a fact that the last analyses of IMAD and Bank of Slovenia show
that in the last months the main...
The motor of high inflation are high costs of services.
The cost of services and salaries are increasing.
Salaries are increasing distinctively in Slovenia.
This is of course connected to the low unemployment,
but there are also legal provisions
that define an increase of certain transfers.
Either pensions or minimum wages.
In times of a high inflation these things have a negative influence
on the inflation or they keep it high.
It is one of the reasons why inflation won't get low as quickly
as it should. We found this intervention reasonable.
The extent is not such as I would want it as a minister,
but this is all the background.
Up until a year and half ago we have all forgotten
what high inflation means.
There are certain Acts
that provide coordination as it is.
And we have another problem in Slovenia,
because different groups of expenditure or transfers
are being coordinated in different patterns and are thus different.
As you know, last year the social transfers
and minimum wage... Actually this year
they harmonized for 10.3%.
This is one of the highest increases in the history.
This is another reason, why we think
that a lower harmonization of social transfers in the next year
would be appropriate. As I've said, there are many reasons,
but one of the main ones is to control the inflation.
Income tax allowance and a systemic problem.
Yes, this is again absolutely
a comprehensive issue of an income tax.
Income tax system is one of the most complex ones
and very non-transparent. I have talked about it before.
It is a similar story as in labour taxation.
We need a comprehensive approach here as well.
We have to look at all allowances that we have.
Different forms of work have different burdens.
We made a step in this direction, but we haven't reached our goals.
This is a comprehensive issue and we have to tackle it as such
together with social partners. I do believe,
if the interest is authentic,
without trying to undermine the efforts
that happen all the time, we could find appropriate solutions,
which would satisfy the employees and the government.
The last question. I know you have an official business
and you're already late. I have to apologize to my colleague.
The last question from Metka Majer.
One comment, please. Today, initiators of the right to have cash
filed the signature to write the right into the constitution.
What is your opinion on this?
Are there any clues that cash would be abolished?
I wasn't really involved in this, but I have read about it.
This appeal surprised me in a way.
In Slovenia, the cash is enacted
as a mandatory means of payment.
Considering the society that we live in,
a society of digitalization and internet,
I would expect the initiatives would go the other way.
Mainly that...
Somebody would stand up for the need
on certain points of sale, which don't accept payment cards,
to allow it. There are many reasons for this.
One of them is informal economy
that could be lower with electronic payment methods.
In many places abroad you can't pay any other way than with a card.
In Slovenia we never discussed it
to limit the cash.
It is a mandatory means of payment, as I've said.
From this point of view I don't quite understand this appeal
to write it in the constitution.
I'm sure the initiators have their reasons or certain fears,
what will happen...
Thank you. Please, send written questions to the Ministry of Finance
or Natural Resources. This is all. Thank you. -Thank you.