Damned if you do, Damned if you don't

The government has just been sworn in and we already have the first crisis. It seems that Ehud Olmert as Minister of Something or Other in the last government (when everything changed a dozen times because of Ariel Sharon's health problems and various ministers quit the government. Magically during that period the government was run by 10 ministers, yet now we need 27 ministers to fill those same jobs, but that is another discussion) approved a price increase on bread. The reasons are complicated and I was not interested enough to investigate it completely. It has to do with increasing prices of wheat on the global market combined with the discounts the wholesale bread makers (a.k.a. bakeries) are allowed to give to the supermarkets combined with the discounts the supermarkets are allowed to give the consumer. In brief,, someone says they are not making enough money and they need to raise the prices.

In a free market, supply and demand would regulate the price of bread, just as it regulates all other prices. If there is a lot of deman for bread for 4 NIS, they can raise the price to what they think will still retain the demand and get away with it. They can charge whatever people will pay. If they raise it to 8 NIS and find the demand decreases because people will not pay that much, they will lower the price. That is the free market. Israel is not a free market. Prices here, at least on staples, are regulated by the government. We are still left with strains of the original socialist government style and therefore we have controlled prices.

Bread, being a staple, is causing the current crisis. The price hike was due to go into law the first day of the new government, last Thursday, Talk about coincidence!! A majority of the current government ran on social platforms. Kadima, the largest of the parties and therefore controlling the government, did not, but its coalition partners all did. Kadima's partners in government are Labor, Shas and the Pensioners Parties. These parties all ran on social platforms, concern for the underprivileged, poor, retirees, etc.. The first item these parties have to deal with is an increase in the price of bread, which will hurt the poor people.

How can they sit in such a government? It goes against everything these parties stand for, at least during the elction campaigning. Are they really social agenda parties? Does Amir Peretz really care about the poor? Does Eli Yishai really care about the poor? Or do they just care about their seats, salaries and prestige? How will they be able to look their voters in the eyes and say we are fighting for a social agenda, sorry we had to raise the price of bread.? It goes completely against their whole essence.

For example, during the elections Kadima spoke almost solely about the upcoming disengagements. That is what they are all about. Nobody expects them to go back on that, as that is who they are. the disengagement defines them. Shas, Labor and the Pensioners all spoke about the poor and social agendas. That is their essence and nobody expects otherwise from them.

How will they deal with this crisis? Will Eli Yishai, the new Minister of Tama"t (Taasiya v'Mischar) cancel the price hike, irking the ire of Ehud Olmert? Will they all approve the hike, irking their constituents? It all remains to be seen. Today their will be a no confidence motion put forth by the Likud in regards to the price hike. How will Shas vote, for the government or against. How will Labor vote, for or against? The Pensioners are already threatening to bolt the government over the hike, so the wheeling and dealing has begun. Will Olmert capitulate in order to save his beloved disengagement?

Another interesting point, when asked how they could join the government despite their having been against the disengagement, El Yishai answered that it is all politics. he said Olmert wants the disengagement, but he may not be able to get it. He then rationalized that because he is not 100% sure Olmert will be able to carry out his wishes, Shas is able to join the government, allowing it to be established, and achieve social issues in the meantime. If/when the time for disengagment comes, they will deal with that then.
Regarding the budget, which had been prepared by the last government and needs to be voted on today, Labor and Shas had vehemently campaigned against it. they argued it hurt the poor and weaker sectors. Now they are in the position where they have to vote (today I thin) to approve or disapprove the budget. Will they stick to their principals and vote against, considering how they fought so hard against it? Will they find some way to vote for it, despite the fact that it goes against everything they said leading up to the elections, and in the last government? Labor already said they are voting for it, with a similar rationalization as that which Eli Yishai rationalized about the disengagement. Shelly Yachamovitch said it is politics and the budget still has to go through many stages of votes where things can be changed. Today's vote is just a formality.
I thought it was Kadima who said they are a party with no ideaology. I did not realize it was a requirement of all the parties in the coalition.

So, the title of the post, "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't"? If Eli Yishai and Amir Peretz vote against the government in the no confidence vote, and against the budget, there is no more government and we are back to elections. If they vote for the govt and budget, they are hurting their own constituents. Either way they are damned.
Today will definitely be interesting.