Amendments to the bill were submitted by MPs Edmunds Zivtiņš (LPV), Edgars tavars (AS), Ramona Petraviča (LPV), Jānis Vitenbergs (NA), Kristaps Kristopans (LPV), Didzis Šmits (AS), linda Liepiņa (LPV), Viktorija Pleškāne (LPV) ) and Ilze Stobova (LPV).
“To make mistakes is only human. And we have to admit our mistakes,and we are only human after all,” opposition MP Edmunds Zivtiņš (LPV) said at the Saeima session.
He expressed that he had always doubted whether the insurance law should be in the Budget and Finance (Taxation) Committee because it is related to road traffic. “This time it turned out the way it turned out,” said Zivtins.
“all of us can make mistakes, but it is indeed very vital to admit our mistakes and correct them, so I call for support [likumprojekta] transfer to the National Economy Commission,” said Zivtiņš.
Deputy Jānis Reirs (JV) expressed at the meeting that he will watch with interest how the situation will develop in the National Economy Commission. “The issue is related to European directives,and the basic problem is that CSDD dose not normally regulate the removal and registration of a vehicle,” said Reirs.
“I have read the European directive, there really isn’t a word about OCTA. (..) I have a question for the responsible ministry that translated this,” opposition MP Aleksej Roslikov (S) said at the meeting.
Several opposition MPs admitted on social media on Wednesday,responding to criticism,that they did not really understand or know what they voted for.For exmaple, MP Andris Kulbergs (AS) wrote on Twitter that he apologizes to motorists for “missing this”, shifting the blame to the Budget Commission of the Saeima, where he does not work. Meanwhile, the proposals submitted for amendments to the OCTA laws show that he had submitted his vision for some amendments to it. “Had I known this, I would never have allowed it to go this way,” Kulberg claimed.MP didzis Šmits also apologized for voting without understanding what it was for.
In the coalition, LETA previously expressed that the issue of the norm of the OCTA law, which stipulates that the OCTA policy will be mandatory for all vehicles in the future, unless their registration has been temporarily suspended, must be assessed and, if necessary, solutions must be found.
It has already been reported that the amendments to the OCTA law adopted by the Saeima on November 14 this year and announced by the President state that the OCTA insurance policy will be mandatory for all vehicles in the future, unless their registration has been temporarily suspended. The amendments to the law will enter into force on December 10 this year.
The representatives of the Latvian Transport Insurers Bureau (LTAB) explain that the regulation in force until now provided that the purchase of an OCTA policy was not mandatory for a vehicle, if it was not used in road traffic and its registration was not terminated simultaneously occurring.
the amendments to the law adopted by the Saeima provide that from now on all vehicles will have to purchase an OCTA policy, regardless of whether the vehicle participates in road traffic, unless its registration in the state or municipal vehicle register has been temporarily suspended.
The mentioned amendments were made in accordance with the requirements of the European Union (EU) directive, and they extend the protection of victims. Jānis Abāšins, chairman of the board of LTAB, explains that this also reduces the risk for the owner of the vehicle, that with the uninsured vehicle in his possession or possession, damage will be caused intentionally or unintentionally to another person’s property or health, for which he will have to pay out of his own pocket as a recourse procedure.
Abāšin adds that such an arrangement is already in place in some neighboring countries, such as Estonia.The requirement of this directive will also have to be followed by the other EU member states that have not yet implemented it.
What are the main concerns regarding the placement of the insurance law in the Budget and Finance Committee?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Edmunds Zivtiņš, MP (LPV)
time.news Editor: Good day,Mr. Zivtiņš! Thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent developments regarding the insurance law and its placement in the Budget and Finance Committee.
Edmunds Zivtiņš: Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to discuss this important issue.
Time.news Editor: Let’s dive right in. You mentioned during the Saeima session that you always had reservations about the insurance law being under the purview of the Budget and Finance (Taxation) Committee due to its focus on road traffic. Can you elaborate on your concerns?
Edmunds Zivtiņš: Absolutely. My concern stems from the fact that insurance is primarily linked to road safety and traffic regulations. It’s crucial that matters relating to traffic—such as insurance for vehicles—are handled by committees that specialize in transportation and public safety. When we place such legislation under a financial committee, we risk overlooking the operational realities and societal impacts of the laws we implement.
Time.news Editor: That’s a valid point. The integration of tax discussions into traffic laws must be sensitive to the citizens affected. What do you think has led to this situation in the first place?
Edmunds Zivtiņš: It likely reflects the complexities of our legislative process. Often, bills are shuffled between different committees due to a lack of clear protocols or political maneuvering. It’s easy to forget that some laws require a nuanced understanding of the subject matter, not just a financial outlook. As I saeid in the session, “To make mistakes is only human,” and recognizing our errors is crucial for growth.
Time.news Editor: Acknowledging mistakes is indeed commendable. The recent amendments to the bill submitted by various MPs demonstrate a collaborative effort. How do you view this interplay among party members, especially across different political factions?
Edmunds Zivtiņš: I believe collaboration is essential in our Parliament. It’s encouraging to see MPs from various parties contributing to dialog on this issue,showcasing that despite political divides,we can come together for the common good. The reality is that when we focus on the welfare of our people, party lines fade. We need to work collectively to ensure any laws we pass are effective and beneficial.
Time.news Editor: So, what’s next for this bill? How do you envision the process moving forward?
Edmunds Zivtiņš: The next steps involve further discussions in committee sessions and incorporating feedback from stakeholders, especially those within the transport and insurance sectors. I hope we can re-route the bill to a more suitable committee for its evaluation, fostering an environment where this legislation is refined and effectively addresses the needs of road users.
Time.news Editor: Your insights on this issue are incredibly valuable.As we reflect on the legislative process, what final message would you like to share with our audience regarding governmental accountability?
Edmunds Zivtiņš: I urge everyone to remember that our government is here to serve the people, and we must hold ourselves accountable.Open dialogue, public participation, and clarity in our legislative processes are essential in ensuring that we not only serve our own constituents but society as a whole. We can only improve by learning from our past decisions.
Time.news Editor: Thank you,Mr. Zivtiņš. Your commitment to accountability and collaboration shines through. We appreciate your time and insights today.
Edmunds Zivtiņš: Thank you for having me. It’s been a pleasure to discuss these issues.