“Chorrord Inknishkhanutyun” comments on new prices of natural gas and electricity for Armenian households that have been suggested by officials from Armenia’s Public Services Regulatory Commission (PSRC). The paper is puzzled by their announcement that the electricity price will go up more drastically than the gas tariff. It argues that gas is used for producing only 40 percent of the country’s electricity. The pro-opposition daily goes on to accuse the PSRC of acting like a “defense lawyer” for the ARG national gas distribution network mostly owned by Russia’s Gazprom. It claims that ARG’s profit margins remain disproportionately large despite claims to the contrary made by the company and the utility regulators.
“Hraparak” wonders what ordinary Armenians think of the government’s new five-year program that was approved by the National Assembly on Thursday and the impending rise in the gas price. The paper wonders whether more of them would now like to leave the country now.
“Zhamanak” accuses the government of profligacy in the use of scarce public funds. “The most important thing is that nobody is held responsible for this,” writes the paper. “There is nobody who will stand up and at least apologize to the public for wasting its money.”
Davit Shahnazarian, a prominent opposition politician, tells “Aravot” that the presidential, parliamentary and local elections held in Armenia over the past year have exposed “the depletion and bankruptcy” of the country’s political system. “In its current form the political system cannot ensure any positive movement,” says Shahnazarian. “In essence, both the government and opposition camps lack a political content and behavior and have separated themselves from the society. The government continues to be oligarchic. It does not carry out political governance. Promises of political changes remain unfulfilled, and the current authorities are not yet taking any steps to prove that they are intent on taking Armenia down the path of a natural development.” Turning to the Armenian opposition, Shahnazarian criticizes it for relying on “revolutionary and non-ideological approaches.”