The fall of Victor Ponta was necessary and well-deserved. He is being investigated for forgery in private deeds, ongoing complicity to tax evasion and money laundering, he is a plagiarist, he is a liar.
The resignation doesn't wash these sins off Victor Ponta, but it certainly gives him an overlooked upper hand over Traian Băsescu, his political opponent for years.
The political argument for the moral victory of Victor Ponta over Băsescu is that Ponta has handed in his resignation, on the pressure of a protest organized by just 25,000 people or so, while Băsescu did not step down when over 7 million people asked him to leave in the referendum of 2012.
The reason why Băsescu returned to the Cotroceni palace after nearly half of the voters had requested he step down may have been that he couldn't leave the country in the hands of a plagiarist and a liar.
But the people's discontent was real.
Now, Victor Ponta can not invoke any similar reason, because it is true that we could do worse than him, but we are talking about the same ilk.
Regardless, he did resign, apparently fulfilling a democratic wish.
Băsescu did not.
The economic arguments, on the other hand, are numerous.
Victor Ponta beat Traian Băsescu because:
- He cut VAT for food to 9%, and next year, VAT will fall to 20%, after the BOC government, through Traian Băsescu's voice, had hiked it to 24%, in 2010.
- He has restored the wages of public sector employees, which had been cut by 25%, through the anti-crisis measures of 2010. The decision made by the government in office at the time, led by Emil Boc, was harshly criticized by the public and by the opposition, resulting in street protests. Also, the Ponta government raised the minimum wage (It is true that the public perceives the economic context differently than the one that was in place during the time of the Boc government - the acuteness of the global financial crisis - which is in reality, very debatable).
-He has cut Social Security Contributions by 5 percentage points for employers, even though this measure has been long debated, requiring the Ponta government to stand up to the IMF. On this occasion, president Traian Băsescu has asked the prime-minister and finance minister Ioana Petrescu to explain which sources of budget revenues would be used to fill the gap created by the cut of Social Security contributions, and the two were kind of flustered.
Despite the opinion of the international financial entities and the sarcasm of the president in office at the time (Traian Băsescu), the governing term of Victor Ponta has seen an economic growth (at least in statistics).
-Has decided to erase the penalties and part of the interest owed to the Tax Administration by companies and individuals.
-Some people think that the privatizations through the Stock Exchange are another point in favor of the Ponta government, which is an opinion whose veracity is perspective-dependent, but can not be ignored as being favorable to it. (In spite of this, the "incredible" Ludwik Sobolewski, the CEO of the BSE yesterday said that the change of the government will eliminate one of the most important unknowns concerning the possible political developments in Romania, which investors view as the main political factor which has negatively affected the activity on the Bucharest Stock Exchange. Sobolewski has thus revealed once again his ungratefulness to a government that has helped him and has revealed his ignoble character).
Another point scored by Ponta in the unimaginable contest with Traian Băsescu was also that the war on corruption attributed to Băsescu has actually manifested itself in all its splendor during the time of the Ponta government.
Even though, over time, the fight between palaces has always been intense, with Băsescu eventually calling "a kitten", yesterday, the former president found it appropriate to defend the former prime-minister.
"The real reason behind the resignation of Victor Ponta is the fact that Gabriel Oprea did not resign", said Traian Băsescu, referring to this still very young politician.
Regardless, what we've talked about in this article is a "contest" between two people no longer in office.