MRF refutes Ninova's statement concerning Porozhanov and PeevskiMonitor News Agency
There is no evidence that Peevski prompted the name of Rumen Porozhanov for the post of agriculture minister. So the MP of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms (MRF) Halil Letifov commented the yesterday's statement by the leader of the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP) Kornelia Ninova who claimed that Porozhanov was recommended for the ministerial office by lawmaker and publisher of Telegraph Media Delyan Peevski. Letifov qualified this statement as “groundless”.
Ninova made this statement at a pre-election meeting without quoting any evidence. Neither did she explain how a lawmaker of the opposition party, which the MRF is, could pick out ministers at all. However, her statement was in synchrony with the claims promoted by the media circle of Capital gravitating to the indicted oligarch Ivo Prokopiev which are not grounded in facts either.
In his commentary Latifov accused BSP of inciting nationalism and populism and declared that the imputation of nexus between Porozhanov and MRF MP Delyan Peevski is groundless. “The commentary proves that they also belong to this vicious model of nationalism and populism. I don’t see any proofs, everyone is responsible for his own actions. As regards the conduct of the BSP, let Ninova tell why they behave so, why are they prone to nationalism and populism. Have they exhausted their programme and proposals for alternative?” he asked.
Letifov also explained why five MPs of the MRF voted against the resignation of former minister of agriculture Rumen Porozhanov and the appointment of Desislava Taneva to this post. “MRF is not against the resignation, it is against this government and the majority of nationalists and populists. As the decision on the resignation and election of a new minister was taken as “two in one” we have voted against the government and against this decision.
If the decisions were made separately we would have voted for the resignation and against the new minister,” Latifov commented. In his opinion, despite the replacement of the agriculture minister, the situation and the model remain the same. “From the very first day we have been maintaining that this government and this majority are detrimental to the state. For two years now we have been witnesses of populism and nationalism. There is nothing different from that,” he commented.