In a recent statement, the advisor to Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Šimonytė condemned the remarks made by Audrius Valotka, the head of the State Language Inspectorate. Highlighting the incomprehensibility of Valotka's rhetoric, the advisor noted that such insults should not be normalized within public discourse, especially in the context of the 21st century. This criticism comes after Valotka made controversial comments regarding the use of certain ethnic terms in a public debate over a local plant shop in Kaunas, 'Čigono daržas'.

The advisor, I. Dobrovolskas, argues that Valotka's repeated comments may call into question his ability to remain in his current position as head of the State Language Inspectorate. The controversy escalated when Valotka suggested that it is acceptable to use terms like 'čigonas' and 'negras', citing a court ruling that deemed such words permissible. The backlash from these statements highlights ongoing tensions regarding the appropriate use of language in society, especially concerning ethnically charged terms that can be offensive.

The debate raises important questions about language policing, societal norms, and the responsibilities of public officials in shaping discourse. With these developments, the government must consider the implications of Valotka's statements and the broader impact they may have on interethnic relations and public sentiment in Lithuania. This situation reflects not only local dynamics but also wider European discussions about language, identity, and tolerance in an increasingly diverse society.