All politicians and all parties claim to want to go “back to the people” so that “the majority” can express itself and point the way for parties and stat to go by. Yet, in Romania, parties and political leaders seem strangely uneasy when confronted with the prospect of public consultation, be it in the form of an election or of a referendum.
Romania should have elections for the European Parlliament till the end of 2007, as per the Treaty which made Romania a part of the EU. Initially the electoral process should have taken place during the spring months, bu the impeachment process against President Basescu made the prime-minister Tariceanu postpone the whole process. After many months of wrangling and accusations of delaying tactics between the main parties the elections were fixed on the 25th of November.
An issue running parallel to that of the European elections is that of the so called “uninominal” vote. Which is to say that most Romanians wish for a move away from the proportional closed list ballot, currently used. The reasons? A perception that this kind of vote encourages political fragmentation, ties the representative to close to his party and does not create political stability. The solution? Well, this is where it gets messy…
A long standing proposal is that of a ONG called “Pro Democratia” (”For Democracy”). They propose a rather interesting and innovative system. It is centered on creating only half as many uninominal electoral colleges as there will be elected representatives. There will be only one So half of the representatives will be elected directly, on a simple majority basis (the candidate with the most votes wins a seat). The other half of elected representatives will be “lucky losers” candidates situated second or third, which shall be provided a seat on the basis of the proportional score of their parties. This system aims to maintain a proportionality of the voting system while introducing an element of uninominal voting that the public wants and, at the oratorical level, almost all politicians support.
The above described project has been much delayed. Agreement on it has been reached and then broken. At long last the Prime Minister Tariceanu agreed to have the government assume responsibility on the project. This made the project pass Parliament. But now the Presidency has objections…
After pushing for the “Pro Democratia” project to be adopted for more that six months and after little clear result the President decided on calling a referendum. The referendum would put forward to the public a new “uninomina” system, that of majority vote in uninominal colleges, in two bouts of voting. This system would ensure a greater political stability, less fragmentation while reducing representativity.
So we now have two directly competing systems. The referendum is set for the 25th of November. The same date as the elections for the European Parliament. Now all the parties, save for the supporters of the President, the PD and PLD, are crying foul. But the President replies that he has waited long enough for the parties to agree and Parliament to adopt a new electoral system.
We are fast coming up on the 25th. A date that will mean a lot for the political landscape of Romania. The European elections will be the first in a series of 5 electoral processes in Romania in less than 2 full years. So they will be seen as an indicator of the political strength of all the parties. On the other hand, if more than 50% plus one of the Romanian voters say yes to the proposal for electoral reform set forth by the President Romania may move from a closed list proportional system to a majority based uninominal system to elect its representatives to Parliament, which would be a huge change…
Back top the people then… I shall report on the results.
Last Thursday a no-confidence vote in the Tariceanu II government, made up of the liberals (PNL) and ethnic Hungarians (UDMR) was defeated in the Romanian Parliament. It needed 232 votes and only received 220.
The no-confidence vote was initiated by the social-democrats (PSD). No one is really sure if it was just a feint or a full blown attempt at bringing down the government. Why possibly a feint? Cause president Traian Basescu, which is empowered by the Constitution to name the Prime Minister, already had stated he would never name a social-democrat for the job. His first choice would be a member of the democrats (PD), his former party. So the no-confidence vote could have been just a feint designed to make the PNL concede some jobs to the PSD.
A full blown attempt at bringing down the government? Certainly so for the democrats (PD) who cast their votes against the government. PSD + PD should have commanded somewhere over 250 votes (there are, apparently, quite a high number of sick reprezentatives in the Romanian Parliament). As such we should now have been talking about the next Romanian government: who was going to lead it and who was going to support it in Parliament. Yet the no-confidence vote failed and the Tariceanu led government look set to rule until the next parliamentary elections due next fall, in 2008.
What’s the aftermath? PSD, the social-democrats, have real internal issues. Mircea Geoana, the current president of the party, seems poised to seek exclusions for the members that did not vote the motion, which include former PSD president and president of the country Ion Iliescu. His attempts could create a rift in the party and maybe even a split into two new political entities.
PD have quickly moved to exclude two of their own members that did not support the no-confidence vote and seek to push their image as the only real political opposition.
PNL and UDMR still have the government, but it might not help them much. Their support in Parliament is around 20% and PSD has vowed to only support laws which have an explicit social-democratic component. It will be tough governing in the minority…
What do you think of a political system in which the opposition is made up of three sizeable parties (PSD, PD and the right-wing PRM) that all claim to oppose both the government and the other two “opposition” parties? What do you think of a country where the government can’t be taken down, even if commands only about 20% of the votes in Parliament?
Romania, over and out. For the moment…
Romanian pensioners are rejoicing. Or at least they should be. Their meager pensions will soon get significant boosts. Pensions in Romania are piggybacked onto the value of the medium wage. As of the 1st of January 2008 the pension point will go up, from 31% to 37% percent of the medium wage. As of the 1st of January 2009 a new rise will kick in, up to 45% of the medium wage.
All is not well, though. If one takes a look at the statistics one can see that Romania has a social contributions related problem. There is a 1 to 1 ratio of contributers to beneficiaries. 1 employee that payes his dues takes care roughly of 1 person that benefits from a pension. And the above basic analysis does not take into account the people that get a pension for their prior agricultural activity, mainly in the collectivized communist agriculture, because they get their money from the state buget directly and not from the social security system or budget.
As such a pension related increase needs to outline some basic economic fundamentals. Which, most commentators agree on, the government of Romania, headed by liberal Calin Popescu Tariceanu, has mainly failed to do. On the grounds of the strain an increase would put on the social security budget the president, democrat Traian Basescu, has initially opposed the increase, only to approve the bill later. Most of the political parties are keen to take the laurels for the increase, beginning with the social-democrats, that are the main supporter of the minority liberal government, and ending with the (so-called) conservatives, that have lead protests to try and promote a speedy increase.
The issue that no party currently touches on is that the increase has little to no economical background. Economical analysts say that the sources for the money necessary for the increase are poorly drawn out. Daniel Daianu, one of the foremost economy professors in Romania, says the rise threatens the flat tax, the main motor for Romania’s recent economic growth and the main economic policy enacted by the liberal government. And the Finance minister has even agreed that most of the burden of the pensions rise will fall upon the next government, as parliamentary elections are scheduled for the fall of 2008.
So, what do you think? Is the rise a purely economical and social measure or more of a political move, in view of upcoming elections for the European Parliament and other forthcoming electoral tests?
Most parties, in most countries where a democratic system is in place, seek to attain power. Depending on the country, its political system, its electoral arrangements being in power can mean wither forming the government as the biggest party in the legislative or to become part of a coalition that has a Parliamentary majority and can pass legislation.
Currently no Romanian party is very interested in governing. Opposition seem to be the most interesting and politically profitable position for all of them. Let’s take them one by one:
- the biggest party in Parliament is PSD, headed by Mircea Geoana, currently has the biggest number of representatives in Parliament. In 2004, after the last elections, it could not form a government because of an alliance of PNL, PD, PC and UDMR;
- PD and PNL, in an alliance called Alianta D.A. (the Justice and Truth Alliance) won the elections of 2004 and were joined by PC, the conservative party, and UDMR, a party representing ethnic Hungarians, to form government. Since 2004 the conflict between the PM Calin Popescu Tariceanu of PNL, the liberals, and President Traian Basescu of PD, the popular democrats, erupted. In 2007 PD was thrown out of government, via a cabinet reshuffle, and then PNL joined PSD, PRM, PC and UDMR in impeaching the President. He was reinstated by popular vote;
We now have the liberals in government, ided by the UDMR, severely restricted in what legislation they can pass by their limited presence in Parliament, around 20%, and under constant threat of a no-confidence vote. It would seem to be a perfect position for the PSD, the social democrats, to drive home their Parliamentary advantage and take the reins of government.
Well, it ain’t so simple as it sounds. The President, Traian Basescu, and his party, PD, are pushing very vocally for early elections as a means to capitalize on their confidence scores which have sky rocketed after the referendum which reinstated the impeached President. To have early elections the current PM needs to be removed, by a no-confidence vote, and then 3 successive candidates for the job of PM must fail to secure the parliamentary backing.
PSD is afraid that the President will pretty much drive the country to early elections by nominating for the position of PM very unpopular figures, which could not secure a Parliamentary backing. And all the parties are afraid of early elections because of their falling poll numbers. As such only the PD is strongly claiming top back any and all no-confidence votes, while PSD is not really itching to propose one.
Romania is currently in a state of limbo, with a weak government, a split opposition and the fear of elections dangling over the heads of all the parties minus the PD. To add to the intensity of the situation we have elections for the European Parliament coming up this fall and an European Commission review in a couple of days…
On the 19th of May the citizens of Romania were asked to vote in a referendum. The issue was whether president Traian Basescu, suspended one moth earlier by Parliament, should be removed from office or reinstated. 44,5% of the more than 18 million voters of Romania have cast a ballot in the referendum. 74,48% voted for the President to be reinstated and 24,75% thought that he should be removed from office.
The current government, dubbed Tariceanu II, is made up of the Liberals, PNL, and the ethnic Hungarian party, UDMR. The government has only about 20% clear support in Parliament. It has been voted in with a clear parliamentary majority, acquiring votes from the likes of the Social-Democrats, PSD, the Conservatives, PC, and the right wing Nationalists, PRM. The only parties clearly against the new government are the Democrats, PD, and the Liberal-Democrats, PLD. All the descriptions associated with the parties in the paragraph above should be taken with a grain of salt as ideological positions in Romania have a habit of being both fluid and not clearly defined…
The Tariceanu II government is set to survive a no-confidence vote today. Traian Basescu, the president, has repeatedly called for early elections, and this motion of no-confidence could have been a fist step towards them, yet that seem to only be supported by PD and PLD, with the majority of Parliament withy their minds set on elections in late 2008.
Current polls seem to indicate that PD, the party formerly led by president Basescu, to be the top choice for the citizens . Both PSD, led by Mircea Geoana, former ambassador to Washington, and PNL, led by current PM Calin Popescu Tariceanu, seem to be on a descending trend. On the other hand both the UDMR, representing the Hungarian minority, and the PRM, led by Corneliu Vadim Tudor, hover around 5%, the threshold for entry into Parliament. There are other minor parties, like PLD, PIN or PNTCD that are unlikely to get 5% of the votes. PNG, advertised as a party for a new generation and led by contested business man George “Gigi” Becali, is set to gain representation.
Romania joined the European Union on the 1st of January 2007. Yet the country is still monitored by the Comission on issues ranging from Justice to the Environment. A report is due out shortly on Romania’s progress. European funds are plentiful, yet the country only has the capacity to absorb a fraction of them, making Romania a net contributor to the European budget.
Romania’s commissioner on the Barosso led European Commission is Leonard Orban, Commissioner for Multilingualism.
