/ world today news/ – The PES president pointed out that the most important leadership quality after the vote will be the ability to dialogue.
– He was adamant that the BSP should start a conversation with the parties of change from now on
In the program “Politically INCORRECT”, Sergey Stanishev warned of three challenges facing the left and expressed the expectation that they will be overcome in the upcoming election campaign:
1. To make sincere efforts for unification within the BSP in the arrangement of the lists and in the campaign itself;
2. The confrontation with President Radev should be replaced by a clear support for the actions of the official cabinet to dismantle the GERB model;
3. BSP to get out of its image as a party of the status quo by starting a conversation with the parties of change.
Asked about the results of the previous elections, the PES president commented that these challenges faced the left even before April 4, but instead of being resolved, they were deepened. “The most important thing that the BSP should have done is to answer for itself why after four years in opposition (provided that the rulers are so unpopular, there were months of protests, rejection of GERB in the elections), it suddenly lost half votes it had in 2017
In my opinion, this is due to several circumstances. First, the line of conduct itself was not sufficiently categorical and clear. When it was not necessary, BSP left the parliament, when it had to leave in the end, it stayed. The left has been broadcasting constant signals of infighting, and no one is casting votes for a divided party. This bickering was going “from above”, from the management. There was a constant search for an “enemy with a party ticket.”
When asked about the new unification on the left, Stanishev pointed out that “in politics, in order to be successful, you must unite, not divide. Now we see an attempt in this direction, through agreements with two parties (we must specify that it is not a new format of the coalition, we cannot talk about a broad left coalition). One is ABV, which received 15,000 votes in the last election, the other is Mr. Kadiev’s party. This in itself is not bad, but to be honest it looks a bit artificial – as does the coalition between the so-called “patriots”. They couldn’t stand each other until a month ago, but now they suddenly became “Bulgarian patriots”. It can be seen that the motive is rather short-term – to make a mechanical sum of votes. But for there to be a serious change in the outcome of our party, we need to show that we have understood what the people who did not support us are telling us.
So far, it does not appear that these lessons have been learned, and I say this with great concern. To unite others, you must first unite yourself from within. It is alarming that publications appear in the media that in nearly a third of the districts, starting with Vidin, Vratsa, Veliko Tarnovo, Kyustendil, Shumen, Dobrich, Plovdiv and others, rank-and-file socialists refuse to participate in the lists, and people , which carry votes. This shows that the party is angry: at the re-imposed leaders who are unknown in a number of regions; of the lack of dialogue. The same applies to the new Executive Bureau – those who were critical of the leadership turned out to be outside it and suggested that the Chairman should resign along with the Bureau. The explanation that this is being done so that list leaders can focus on the campaign very comfortably does not apply to vice-presidents who continue to lead lists.”
“I am also worried about other things. First, the line of conduct. When any attempt at union is made, it is with a view to future partners. The BSP did it at the expense of its potential partners in governance. I’m referring to the “Stand Up!” coalition. It didn’t work out with Tatiana Doncheva, and that might have been the only sign of this unification attempt that the BSP is closer to the parties of change than to the parties of the status quo. The chairman of the party himself said after the elections that the BSP was not recognized as an alternative and was perceived as part of the status quo. So a connection with the parties of change had to be sought. And the BSP, in the few weeks of work of the parliament, retaliated with “There is such a people”, and with “Stand up!”, and with DB, i.e. with potential partners, and this sets a bad trend for possible involvement in future governance.”
“The second question is about relations with the president. During the previous campaign, we were told that the issue of the presidential elections would be decided later, after the procedures were over; we have seen that this is not the case. Now, however, an artificial dividing line has been created that the National Assembly must vote on which potential cadres of the left should participate in the caretaker government. This has never been done. It is not about a government that is elected by the parliament with a political mandate, but an ex officio one appointed by the president. I also see that political scientists, speakers close to the leadership of the BSP are extremely critical of the cabinet. My understanding is that it appeals to people looking for a change. I don’t understand why this distancing is needed, even by BSP members,” commented Stanishev.
“There are also a number of other questions to which there is still no clear answer. After all, who are our partners in the future? What policy are we betting on, what are the red lines for BSP? I rather see an imitation of changes than a real change in the internal line of the BSP, in the signs it gives to society. I say all this so that these things can be cleared up before and during the campaign, and not piled up as potential problems.”
When asked about the new formation of Zhan Videnov, Stanishev replied that he was worried because with so many unifications and supposedly “broad” coalitions, in fact the left is dividing more and more. “I read their address. They are quite critical of BSP, but more worryingly, there are no differences in content. Their messages overlap with the concept of the so-called “conservative left”, which I have always said is absurd. A left should be progressive, not conservative. It focuses more on nationalism and patriotism than substantive left-wing policies. It lacks connection with the European modern left as content in every respect. It will be difficult for them to gain entry into the parliament, but there is a chance that they will gather certain votes, including leftist voices, because Zhan Videnov is perceived in the circles of the left as an honorable person – an unconditional quality of his. But if we talk about these, there is more talk about the past than about the future. And politics is a conversation about the future. This will be key for the next parliamentary elections.”
“A party that wants to win the elections must say not only what it will do, but also how it will do it, i.e. what are the possible configurations. People understand that the parliament will be fragmented, torn apart, but they expect a way out of this situation so that it does not lead to a third election. Bulgarians want politicians to find a solution. It must be clear that there will be a coalition, the question is what kind.”
In the conversation with Petar Volgin, Stanishev also outlined the political goals for the next government:
“In terms of health, the pandemic must be controlled. We are already seeing a positive trend, but the health crisis has not yet been completely overcome.
The Recovery Plan is also a priority. It must be corrected, presented and start to be implemented, because people in Bulgaria need support. I can say good words about the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr. Pekanov, who is very active in Brussels, has a strong enough team and is trying to make the necessary improvements. I am trying to help him and his team and I have already made contact with the Commissioner for Economy, Paolo Gentiloni. On the part of the socialist commissioners, there will be cooperation and support for Bulgaria to develop a good plan that is effective and can help us get out of the crisis we are in.
After the elections, people expect the normalization of public life and the restoration of institutionality. Democracy is a balance between powers, all power cannot be concentrated in one hand, because that is vicious.”
“The topic of Green Deal is leading in the EU. We can’t bury our heads in the sand and say how dangerous it is. Yes, it carries risks, but it has been a trend in Europe for almost a decade now. Bulgaria must have its own plan on how to restructure the economy, what compensations to ask for and how to help the people in the regions that will be affected. For this purpose, significant funds have been earmarked by the EU. If we do nothing, we will achieve nothing,” added Stanishev.
When asked how the pandemic affected EU policies, the PES president highlighted the main achievements of the left-wing political family in the last year, as well as a number of upcoming social initiatives:
“I can confidently say that we have achieved a lot in the last year. We PES were the first to state that in this crisis the policy of restrictions on social and budget expenditures, which was imposed during the previous crisis, should not be repeated in any way. It was important that this was achieved because the response years ago destroyed whole societies in Europe.
Since the beginning of the crisis, we have stated that there is a need for a large-scale economic plan that uses new tools. As a result of our efforts, for the first time the EU will issue a common debt, which is a new step in the integration of the Union. Together with funds from the regular budget of the EU, Bulgaria is about to receive 27-28 billion euros. This is a very serious investment resource as long as it is spent wisely and money is not spent without sufficient effect and without added value.
At the initiative of the Portuguese Presidency and the leftist Prime Minister Antonio Costa, after nearly four years, we have achieved a new summit on social policies. As a result, European leaders have made many commitments for a much more focused social policy, to protect jobs for the younger generation, to protect children from poverty, to create conditions for decent work and the role of collective bargaining in this process. This is not the end of the process, we will continue with pressure for concrete solutions, and a few months ago the commissioner from our family, Nicola Schmidt, developed an action plan to defend and implement social policies. We manage to shift the focus and the view of the European institutions to the social sphere, because they are beginning to understand very clearly that without a strong social policy, Europe will not have support from the citizens. To feel that no one is left behind, that everyone can count on support from their country and the EU. This is the meaning of social policy,” the leader of the European left summed up the achievements of PES.
#Stanishev #election #won #party #gave #formula #stable #government
