After the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) submitted a motion of no confidence in the Borissov 3 cabinet for failure to cope with corruption in the very first month of the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of Europe – January – now, in the last presidency month, it is once again demanding a no confidence vote in the cabinet for failure to address the problems of security. The January vote failed, and this month’s vote is likely to follow suit.

In January, as now, the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (DPS) is standing by the BSP though the sumtotal of votes of the two formations are not enough for the vote of no confidence to be passed. Volya, the party of businessman Veselin Mareshki decided on a wait-and-see position, whereas the coalition of the ruling party GERB and the United Patriots are solidly against. Unlike the ruling coalition, the opposition “Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) for Bulgaria” coalition is not as united, and just a few days ago ruled to expel the Alexander Stamboliyski Agrarian Union from the coalition – not only did the Agrarian Union state it wanted to run in the forthcoming local elections as a stand-alone entity, but also demanded compromises with the ruling coalition on certain issues.

There are several lines along which the parliamentary debate will run, and they are well known in advance. Over the weekend the socialists made it clear that they will accuse the government of abdicating from its obligations of guaranteeing the security of citizens and safeguarding the country’s borders, of handing the responsibility of protecting the nation over to private companies, of “colluding” with European leaders to the detriment of the country. GERB dismissed all of the accusations by the socialists as speculation, vehemently denying any collusion, and put any criticism down to envy, the result of the successes of the ruling coalition. The United Patriots stated that the BSP had no serious arguments for a vote of no confidence over security issues, and that it was submitting the motion for no other reason than to mark the close of the Presidency of the Council of the EU, adding that public sentiments were not lending towards a change of government.

The logical question that arises is – if it is a foregone conclusion that the opposition votes will not be enough to bring down the government in this vote of no confidence, and the arguments of all sides are clear even before any discussion, why bother going through the motions?

In an analysis of the previous no confidence motion we pointed out that in Bulgaria no confidence motions are used by the political forces as a tool for lending poignancy or boosting certain causes, and that they readily admit it. This time the principal reason seems to be to downplay the assessments of the Bulgarian Presidency of the Council of the EU as a success. That the presidency has been successful is something that can be contested, but one thing is certain – that the series of unsubstantiated no confidence motions is getting to be irritating. Throughout the entire most modern history of Bulgaria, there has never been a no confidence vote that has been successful, but there was one time, when, over 25 years ago, the then ruling Union of Democratic forces (SDS) submitted a motion of confidence in its own government, and lost. A paradox indeed.

English version: Milena Daynova