The saying “I look forward to elections more than Christmas” is not far-fetched. After all, the gifts offered during election season are incomparably larger than those we usually find under the Christmas tree. This year, political parties preparing for the October elections did not promise mugs, socks, or boxes of sweets. Instead, they wrapped higher public spending and tax breaks in colorful, gently rustling paper, tying the ideas of a state-owned commercial bank and universal basic income with pink ribbons. So, is Christmas really the most anticipated holiday of the year?

By the time you read this, the parliamentary elections will already be over, and the frenzy of distributing political promises will have subsided. Yet the process of forming the government’s program will still lie ahead. Some of the promises that parties across the political spectrum made to voters will soon have to turn into real commitments—and tangible results. Given that Lithuania typically forms coalition governments, the parties shaping the majority will have a real opportunity to separate the wheat from the chaff: to offer the solutions the country truly needs. In other words, gifts that cannot be returned—neither within two weeks of “purchase” nor at the next parliamentary elections.

The first gift is a voucher for high-quality legislation. Like any gift voucher, it is easy to offer—everyone agrees it would be useful. Who would not want clearer, better laws that actually achieve their goals? Yet delivering on this promise is much harder. High-quality lawmaking is not about amending a single law or reforming one policy area. It requires a shift in mindset and political will—lawmakers who impose rules and restrictions must be willing to restrain themselves. We must all recognize, including politicians, that not every problem can be solved through legislation and that government should focus on its core functions: ensuring order and stability.

Still, it is striking how little attention even major parties paid to this fundamental responsibility during the campaign. The “inflation” of laws, declining legislative quality, and the tendency to address every issue with new regulation were only mentioned in passing. Proposals such as systematic evaluation of legislation or introducing sunset clauses were treated cautiously. Yet lawmaking will remain the primary task of Members of Parliament.

Another “gift voucher” commonly included in party programs is support for investment and a business-friendly environment: investing in infrastructure, improving roads and energy networks, supporting companies, nurturing start-ups, promoting exports, and fostering innovation. However, party rhetoric has often been contradictory. In some parts of their programs, parties praised and supported small and medium-sized businesses; in others, they accused companies of “greed” and criticized the functioning of markets.

Such rhetoric sends an important signal to both domestic and foreign investors. It shapes expectations about whether business will be recognized as the foundation of national prosperity, whether competitiveness will be strengthened, and whether Lithuania will remain attractive for investment—or risk losing both capital and talent to other countries.

This “gift” needs clarification: promise only what can actually be delivered. Businesses do not need to be led by the hand—they need high-quality, efficient public services and cooperation between public institutions and private initiative to create value. For example, if large investment projects can benefit from fast-track procedures such as a “green corridor”—where construction permits can be granted within days or planning requirements simplified—then similar opportunities should be available to small family businesses as well. It is encouraging that many parties support the idea of not taxing reinvested profits, but it is crucial that this is implemented smoothly and without excessive regulation.

Drawing a clear line between what government can do and what it should refrain from is important not only for businesses but for society as a whole. Yet party programs included proposals such as universal basic income, a shorter working week with unchanged pay, and the creation of a state-owned bank. These ideas are utopian, ignoring two basic facts: resources are limited, and value can only be created through productive activity. Otherwise, the consequences for the economy could be severe, and attempts to shower everyone with easy money would more likely lead to poverty than prosperity.

Perhaps the most valuable gift the new governing majority could offer—if not by Christmas, then at least at the start of the new term—is a commitment to clearly define its responsibilities, respect the limits of power, and resist the temptations that come with it. Any political majority can make such a commitment, and coalition governance should allow the best ideas from different parties to be combined into a coherent program.

The rest is up to us: to watch closely and make sure that the expiration date of these “gift vouchers” has not quietly passed.