Editorial Press Review November 1

The possibility of suspending the agreement with IMF also emerged because the Fund proved great sensitivity when it came to the banker’s requests.

Bankers complain the retroactivity of the Emergency Ordinance no.50.

The claim that nobody can intervene now on the cost of a credit granted three years ago. But most of them contradict themselves.

The bankers complain that they meet the same situation their customers have experienced so far.

When the bank increased the interest or the commissions of some credits, didn’t the problem of retroactivity emerge? Wasn’t it a subsequent take of action regarding the initial cost of the credit?

And, in what concerns the direct blackmail of the IMF, - thinks Victor Rotariu - the latter the stranger it is, the more the Fund, that Big Banker of the worldwide bank system, would never afford to increase the interest charged to a customer if this one complied with its role in the contract as its ‘younger brothers’, that is Romania’s banks, did with their common customers.

Dan Cristian Turturica also writes in ‘Romania libera’ about the discussions with the Fund, not in the economic context, but in the political one; the journalist assumes that, in fact, SDP does not wish the collapse of Boc’s government and explains his opinion.

The few financial supporters from SDP (the Social Democratic Party) who administered the relationship with the IMF in the past know for sure that Romania cannot afford to break the agreement. And, implicitly, that they could not avoid absolutely anything from the hard measures of cutting the budgetary spendings we have to decide on.

For that reason, even a year of governance under the careful eye of IMF would rapidly ruin the virtual elective percentage SDP is boasting with now. Dan Cristian Turturica adds that as a consequence of SDP being too much effective by staying as far as possible from the executive’s responsibilities and oppresss DLP (the Democratic Liberal Party) so that 2011 catch the social democratics as high as possible at the polls.

In Adevarul, Ovidiu Nahoi comments upon an event that can be easily noticed after Romania’s adhesion has made possible the facile access to the Universities in the European Union: many parents want to send their children to schools far from their home.

Youngsters’ departure to foreign Universities may be a good chance if Romania knows to get them close and make use of them at a proper time. Or it may be a historic disaster. It depends on the intellectuals who have continued to live here and who should wake up at the last moment to give meaning to the country.

In other words - Ovidiu Nahoi concludes – those who think that going to a pub is more important than, let’s say, visiting a book fair will continue on deciding for Romania for the next decades.

Translated by: Roxana-Maria Budulan (Chesnoiu) and Elena Daniela Radu
MA students, MTTLC, Bucharest University