Motion of censure: big and small lies, economic absurdities and a "kernel" of truth

The motion of censure read in Parliament and which is to be voted on is based on economic content, but includes several untruths and a "kernel" of truth.

The text of the motion relies on the idea of selling state assets. A so-called privatization and restructuring program of state companies is harshly criticized. The first untruth of the motion is that the argumentation is based on a Report on companies eligible for listing on the Bucharest Stock Exchange drafted by the cabinet of Deputy Prime Minister Oana Gheorghiu.

The first untruth of the motion is the deliberately erroneous interpretation of the report on state companies. Specifically, the analysis addressed to the government is purely informative, a working proposal, and this is explicitly stated in the report: "these estimates are calculated at current market prices, do not constitute commitments, and depend on market conditions at the time of execution." The motion of censure presents the evaluations and figures as if they were already decided. In reality, the government's analysis clearly states for companies that are not listed on the BVB that a feasibility study will be needed to define the company's value, the package of shares put up for sale, and the chosen method.

For example, within the text of the motion of censure, it is written that "in the case of Romgaz, it falls even below essential control thresholds." This is a great untruth, because the government report clearly states that in all situations (Romgaz, Transgaz, Transelectrica, etc.) state control in companies must be maintained by keeping the majority share package.

The initiators of the motion of censure are wrong when they label a number of state companies as strategic. In the motion, companies such as CEC Bank, Bucharest Airports, the Port of Constanța, the Romanian Lottery, or the Romanian Post are lumped together as strategic companies. It is evident that there is no question that all these companies are truly "strategic."

The motion of censure also includes an economic aberration, namely that "listing is a useful tool for inefficient companies." The parliamentarian who read the motion knows very well that this is a great untruth. Petrișor Peiu has an impressive portfolio of shares in companies listed on the Bucharest Stock Exchange (BVB), but the question is simple: would he buy shares in an inefficient company? Obviously not. No investor would place their money in a company that wants to come to the Stock Exchange but has losses and very high debts.

The "kernel" of truth in the motion is the contestation of the accelerated sale mechanism of some minority share packages. The topic deserves a separate debate, in which to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the method, but strangely, the PSD, instead of having a dialogue on this subject within the coalition, preferred to provoke a political crisis.

The text of the motion is not lacking in small repeated lies, such as the reduction of the threshold for micro-enterprises (it was an aberration for the Romanian economy to have a turnover threshold of one million euros annually), the elimination of tax incentives for salaries in various fields (there is a need for equal tax treatment for all companies and employees), multinational companies that externalize their profits (the populist obsession of nationalist politicians who do not rely on any concrete case discovered by ANAF), and high inflation (which was mainly generated by the reliberalization of the electricity market, a process that should have been prepared by the Ciolacu government).

The reduction of public investments is criticized, especially the restriction of the Anghel Saligny programs or those of the National Investment Company (CNI). The signatories of the motion forget that the government program assumes a saving of 10 billion lei through better prioritization of investments. The figures show that in the period when the pedal of public investments was pressed (as happened in 2024), their growth-generating effect was ridiculously small. Therefore, the reduction of allocated amounts for investments, their prioritization, is good news for the Romanian economy.

In conclusion, the motion is full of politics and contains few economic arguments. It is a motion impregnated with an ultra-nationalist vision in economic matters, where the PSD and AUR shake hands and agree.