A PSD minister presents the arguments of the motion against the Bolojan Government. “Indignation, contempt and disgust.” The PSD plan if the motion passes

Former PSD Minister of Labor Petre Florin Manole rejects the idea that his party threw Romania into crisis through the censure motion submitted alongside AUR and PACE. He claims, in an interview with the HotNews audience, that the economic degradation started earlier and that the current motion is the result of an accumulation of grievances: “The economic situation has been deteriorating for a long time, not a week, two weeks or three weeks.”

On Tuesday, the Parliament votes on the censure motion submitted by PSD, AUR and PACE against the Bolojan Government, at a time when the political crisis has led to economic pressures: the depreciation of the leu, the increase in borrowing costs and warnings of instability. Asked if the PSD has borne the cost of political instability, Petre Florin Manole claims that things will be regulated after the motion.

Petre Florin Manole rejects the idea that the PSD is mainly responsible for the nervousness in the markets and claims that the economic situation “has been depreciating for a long time”, citing inflation, technical recession and the decrease in purchasing power. He defends the motion as a necessary political reaction, claims that a joint vote with AUR does not mean a future PSD-AUR government and states that, if the motion passes, the solution must still be a pro-European coalition, but without Ilie Bolojan.

Manole was Minister of Labor in the Bolojan Government until PSD withdrew from the Executive. A social-democratic deputy in his third term and one of the PSD politicians of the new generation, Manole was an activist for human rights and had parliamentary activity in the social and minority rights area.

“The motion is not a solitary idea, born in a party conclave”

HotNews: After the announcement of the PSD-AUR motion, negative signals appeared: the euro reached almost 5.20 lei, the interest rates at which Romania borrows rose from 6.2% to 7%, there are losses on the stock market. From your point of view, did PSD contribute to this nervousness in the markets?
Petre Florin Manole: The answer can't be that simple, because we have to look at more numbers. For example, if we look at the figures related to the direct interest of the citizen, such as inflation and purchasing power, because I suppose they should be the most important for politicians, we see that: we had at the beginning of the summer of 2025 inflation of 5.56%, now the inflation is almost 10%. I find this a worrying figure. If you want me to refer to the figures presented by you, I can paraphrase today's statement of the president, who said that these situations are nothing special and that, after the motion, we will see that things will be regulated.

– However, the increase in the euro, interest rates can be seen as a consequence of this crisis. Do you think that PSD has a responsibility for these?
– I think that for all the macroeconomic indicators of the last ten months, all governing parties have responsibilities to different extents. Why do I say in different measures? Because it is not in the government program and the VAT increase was not assumed by anyone, it was a decision taken personally by Prime Minister Bolojan, including the president being against the increase. However, VAT is an important macroeconomic indicator for the citizen's budget – if you were also thinking about the citizen's budget with the earlier question.

I don't know if the question was ever asked in the public space: “Do you feel a responsibility, Mr. Bolojan, for the depreciation of the purchasing power of the citizens and for the doubling of inflation?”. It should be rhetorical, because the answer is obvious. It's on paper, it's at the National Institute of Statistics, it's not at PSD.

We are in a social and economic crisis, both attested by official figures: technical recession, falling purchasing power, for more than a week, two weeks or three weeks. The fact that we are in this situation, which is depreciating both economically and socially, requires, in our opinion, some measures, a reaction.

Moreover, they were preceded by a whole set of measures and messages. For example, the political message – given by more than 2 parliamentarians or 2 people from the party's leadership, but by the entire party – is that this prime minister no longer has our support. This happened.

The day after I gave this political message, you didn't see any depreciation of the course, speaking of correlations. After which I said that we will withdraw the ministers from the government. The reaction was zero after the political message and after this warning. We withdrew from government. Reactions, still zero. I mean I had messages in spades, warning signs after warning signs, until I got here. It was no longer a surprise for anyone when PSD said it was submitting a motion.

“On the flag of USR reforms is this coat of arms, Salvador Caragea”

– However, there is also a part of Romanians who believe that the PSD-AUR motion creates political instability, more economic instability. How do you convince them that the current instability is an acceptable price for the change of Ilie Bolojan?
– I return to the paradigm difference. We believe and explain with figures that the economic situation has been depreciating for a long time! Regardless of opinion, no one can dispute that. Recession cannot be fought with opinions or contradicted without numbers.

Of course, there are some who will say that PSD is to blame, no matter what happens, just as there are others who think that USR, PNL or Călin Georgescu are to blame. There will always be different opinions and that's what democracy is all about.

Even Mr. Salvador from USR says that PSD is to blame (former commander of IPJ Gorj and former AUR member/sympathizer, appointed by the USR Minister of Economy, Irineu Darău, special administrator at Uzina Mecanică Sadu, strategic armament factory, no). Sure, it's his right to say that. After all, on the banner of the USR reforms is this coat of arms, Salvador Caragea, in all the fullness of his intellectual capacities. Mr. Vasile Blaga from PNL, after 30 years of politics full of reforms and success and full of promoted European values, says that PSD is to blame. Allow us to have a small caveat…

Petre Florin Manole's question, “with indignation, contempt and disgust”

– PSD says it does not want government with AUR. However, the motion is submitted together with AUR and PACE. For citizens, investors and external partners, doesn't the simple image remain that PSD and AUR are together tearing down a pro-European government? Why is AUR acceptable as a partner to bring down governments, but unacceptable as a partner in governance?
– The question that can be asked, at different times of our recent history, to both the PSD and the USR, equally signatories of a motion with the AUR, has the following answer: In the Parliament there are many projects that are voted on in different forms. In this case, the motion gathers the votes of those who are dissatisfied. Dissatisfaction is a negative feeling, it is not a constructive feeling.

We will, therefore, have a motion that will be voted on by those dissatisfied in the Parliament. In the past – because we can draw inspiration from the past – the USR motion with AUR did not lead to a USR-AUR government. Why wouldn't we look at the current situation equally?

Secondly, the discussion about how acceptable or unacceptable it is in the mainstream space to have a vote in the same direction of some PSD MPs and AUR MPs is a public topic.

The arguments were public. My rhetorical question, with indignation, contempt and disgust, is the following: What are the public interest arguments assumed by all the PNL negotiators, who are now trying to convince parliamentarians equal to those with whom the PSD talked to vote or not? What are the arguments there? What principles, values ​​and reforms will it be about when Vasile Blaga negotiates with a parliamentarian not to vote for this motion? How much do you think, without laughing and sounding ridiculous, that reforms are being discussed there, about the functioning of the rule of law and about Romania's European path? Why certain things argued publicly seem to raise questions, and this kind of rats, as I think Prime Minister Bolojan would call them, non-transparent and non-public, are acceptable? They are not acceptable!

It is a double discourse, not at all sophisticated, with a minimum of intellectual effort. And I don't think that the majority of Romanian citizens accept this situation. But yes, Mr. Salvador Caragea and Mr. Vasile Blaga, two people dedicated to reforming the Romanian state, certainly negotiate behind closed doors in the name of principles and reforms. I am on the same side of the barricade as Mrs. Oana Gheorghiu. Superb.

About restoring the coalition, without Bolojan: We have expressed the reasoned dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Bolojan

– What is the plan if the motion passes? Do you have the name of the prime minister, the majority, the economic program, the calendar for the deficit and the PNRR?
– A good part of these question marks are clarified by the procedure and the public discourse. Namely, the procedure tells us that there must be consultations if this motion is to pass. And I am very optimistic that it will pass. In the course of the consultations, we already have some benchmarks from different parties and a benchmark from the president. And because the president will make the next nomination, I think he has the right to have the benchmark that his lordship laid out as a starting point: that there will have to be a pro-European, pro-Western coalition. Did you see us say anything else? No, because we don't think it should be any other way.

– How possible is this scenario?
– Everything that is possible from the point of view of parliamentary arithmetic is also possible from the point of view of political possibilities. If the current coalition can restore a majority, from the point of view of numbers, then it can also restore it from the point of view of negotiations.

– But if PNL does not sacrifice Ilie Bolojan, what is PSD's plan? You said that, if the motion passes, PSD has two options: rebuilding the pro-European coalition or the opposition. The third option you say does not exist. But if the first option is blocked by the PNL, isn't only the opposition left?
– If. But I think we have less than 24 hours to find out what happens after the “if”.

– Could Alexandru Nazare be a solution to unblock the crisis?
– I don't know that, you have to ask PNL. We have not spoken against any other PNL member, from the point of view of the government's conduct. We have expressed our reasoned dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Bolojan.

– What about Cătălin Predoiu?
– The National Liberal Party must have this decision within itself. We recognize their right, as we hope from all our opponents to recognize our right to have our own opinions.

– At the moment we are discussing, PSD believes that it is a good decision to submit a motion of censure for the change of the prime minister. What should happen for the PSD to see this action as a mistake?
– PSD does not think it is a good idea because it thought so, without any argument. PSD believes that this motion is a necessity when it has behind it the figures showing double inflation in the last 10 months. Is this a bad thing for society? Yes. The PSD has behind it the figure of 80% dissatisfaction with the society. This is not a PSD argument, but a sociological one.

PSD says the loss of 70,000 jobs in the real economy is a problem. PSD says that the technical recession is a fact, not an opinion. Well, if all these tangible arguments stand, as Arghezi would say, then please do not evaluate this motion as a solitary idea, born in a party conclave. It's a theme that emerges from a host of visible, measurable, yearbook-published citizen grievances. Those who want to contradict the National Institute of Statistics can do so, but they must know that there is a big difference between INS and PSD.