Over the past few days, the main subject of public discussion has been a petition titled "For the growth of the people's income! For the development of industry!". The debate over its merits continues unabated against the backdrop of another, no less important issue concerning the abolition of the recycling fee.
It is worth recalling that the authors of the petition "For the growth of the people's income!" advocate "for the active development and support of local production", which, in their view, will help establish the economic sovereignty of the state.
The petition was supported by official representatives of the company "Qarmet", employees of the Karaganda Foundry and Machine-Building Plant (KLMZ) of the "Kazakhmys" group, companies of the "Imstalcon" group, employees of the "QazTehna" plant, and many others.
At the same time, the petition "The People of the Republic of Kazakhstan Against the Recycling Fee and Primary Registration", created on the official online platform epetition.kz in March of this year, continues to rapidly collect signatures.
And while the progressive public is engaged in heated debates on social networks, some details may escape their attention. For instance, quite recently in Semey, a person was spotted who bears a strong resemblance to the former akim of the East Kazakhstan region, Danial Akhmetov.
One might assume that Mr. Akhmetov, if he was indeed in Semey, was there solely for personal reasons. However, the controversial activities of the ex-akim inevitably lead one to ponder the political motives behind his presence in the city.
And considering his past war with local businesses and numerous failed initiatives aimed primarily at enriching the politician's family and his associates, we might assume that Mr. Akhmetov did not appear in Semey to sightsee.
Incidentally, not long ago, workers from the "SemAZ" plant, joining the comments of their colleagues in other cities of Kazakhstan, recorded a video message in support of the petition "For the growth of the people's income!", also mentioning that the idea of abolishing the recycling fee is being lobbied in the interests of certain individuals, not the entire people.
Whether one should link the aforementioned events together, we leave the reader to decide.