Boris Mugoša for "Vijesti": First let's expand the alliance, then we will elect a leader

The European Union is currently in talks with other political organizations, non-partisan associations and individuals, and in the next few months it will be known who could be part of this platform. Once that is defined, we will go into the process of selecting someone who could be the first among equals - said the head of the European Union parliamentary group, Boris Mugoša.

In an interview with "Vijesti", he said that through certain research they realized that some more things needed to be done to further increase the recognition of this non-partisan platform, which consists of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the Social Democrats (SD) and the Liberal Party (LP), and that they are now in the phase of trying to expand the alliance and that they are "on the right track to make that happen."

"In the next few months, we will get certain contours of who will potentially be part of the alliance, and then we will naturally move towards the elections and towards defining someone who will be the first among equals and who will properly represent this non-partisan vision of ours, together with the others," Mugoša said.

He pointed out that, for example, SD did not want to hold a regular congress, precisely because they wanted to affirm a non-partisan approach. He stated that they wanted to completely break away from narrow-party thinking, and that he was convinced that citizens needed some kind of non-partisan offer.

Speaking about what will be the focus of the European Union in the run-up to next year's parliamentary and local elections, Mugoša said that their platform will be based on the economy and a better standard of living, a more socially just society, the rule of law, the fight against crime and corruption, strengthening the professionalism and independence of institutions...

"We want identity issues, which are increasingly emphasized, not to be the focus of public discourse, because this only further deepens the divisions in our society," the interlocutor emphasized.

Recently, the SD parliamentary group in the Parliament was renamed the European Union Parliamentary Group. Why did you decide to make that move?

This move has both symbolic and, above all, essential significance. It is our desire to contribute to the affirmation of the new project we are advocating - the formation of a non-partisan platform. Our political-programmatic platform goes beyond parties, we want to form an alliance and gather in it, in addition to parties and non-party associations, various individuals, activists - all those who have a similar system of values, which is a civic and progressive ideological framework.

This formation of the European Alliance parliamentary group is one in a series of steps towards the affirmation of that idea. We will implement similar things at local levels. I deeply believe in the idea of ​​the European Alliance, or rather a non-partisan platform, and I think it is necessary for the prosperity of our country and political stability in Montenegro.

Does this mean that SD, SDP and LP will cease to exist in party form?

We are fully focused on shaping the aforementioned programmatic and political platform. We are in talks with other political organizations, non-partisan associations and individuals so that they too can become part of that platform. For example, we (SD) did not want to hold a regular congress precisely because we wanted to affirm this non-partisan approach. We are building this story very seriously and are analyzing every step in detail and are acting responsibly towards it. We are and will be participating in the elections as a non-partisan alliance.

The European Union was formed in the summer of 2024. Since then, you have run in several local elections, including in Podgorica and Nikšić. What do you see as good and bad moves since then?

When you form a structure, especially when you want it to grow into a credible non-partisan story - it takes some time. First, of course, it took time for the constituents themselves to get used to it, and on the other hand, it is important that we have already included non-partisan figures in the election processes in which we participated. This is a process that we are building and of course we are aware that we need to further affirm the brand of the European Union and bring it closer to the public in an adequate way, and we are now working more intensively on that.

In this general turmoil - the idea of ​​uniting progressive segments of society met with very good reactions from the public. As time goes by, these reactions are increasingly positive and the formation of the European Union is fully justified. We have achieved very fair results in certain local elections, and I am sure that in a year these results will be much, much better.

The European Union still does not have a single leader. Do you think that was an obstacle to better results in some previous elections, as some analysts claim? Do you think that the European Union needs a single, non-partisan leader?

Through certain research, we have recognized that it is necessary to do some more things to further increase the visibility of the European Union. We are now in the phase of trying to expand the European Union and we are well on our way to making that happen. In the next few months, we will get certain outlines of who will potentially be part of the union, and then we will naturally move towards the elections and towards defining someone who will be the first among equals and who will properly represent this non-partisan vision of ours together with the others.

We will naturally move towards that process, but our priority now is to finalize all the segments of this alliance in the next month or two.

Were specific names mentioned, who could be at the head of the alliance?

Out of fairness to the people we are talking to and to certain political entities and non-partisan associations, I would not like to discuss these details at this time, but the public will soon be informed and I am sure that they will react positively. We want to completely move away from narrow-party thinking, because I am convinced that citizens need some kind of such a non-partisan offer. I am sure that the European Union will be one of the foundations of all progressive processes in the future.

How do you view the criticism that both the European Union and the Democratic Party of Socialists (DPS) are just waiting for an "invitation" to enter the Government?

We should just separate who is making such comments. Certain constituents of the current government want to use these untruths to whitewash their political biography, or rather to find justification for why they are part of such a wrongly tailored majority. On the other hand, there are also people who, by "default", want to criticize every process, and of course there is the third group that I respect the most, who have hinted in their thoughts that they have sometimes gained such an impression.

We did not wait for an invitation, nor are we waiting for one - because we do not want to be part of such a majority, for which the only cohesive factor is the distribution of functions. There have been calls to participate in this government, but we have remained consistent with what we advocate, which is that the government should be a union of subjects who share ideological values ​​and who have a genuine desire for this country to be European, progressive, civic, and emancipated.

On the other hand, our time in opposition has helped us to look at the mistakes we made while in power from a more objective perspective, because serious and responsible people should always analyze and reexamine their actions.

On what will you base the tactics of the European Union's future actions, in the run-up to next year's national and local elections? What will be the focus - the economy, identity issues, the incompetence of the government, or a cocktail of all of these?

Elections at the state level and in all local governments are a serious test for Montenegrin society. We have formed this non-partisan political-program platform in order to independently participate in all elections, because we want to be a credible offer that offers a clear, realistic and sustainable program.

We will focus on the everyday challenges that citizens face. These are the economy and a better standard of living, a more socially just society, the rule of law, a decisive fight against crime and corruption, and the need to strengthen the professionalism and independence of institutions. We want identity issues that are increasingly emphasized not to be the focus of public discourse, because this only further deepens the divisions in our society.

The essence of our actions is to truly make the country a better and higher quality place for all citizens to live - and that means improving living standards, healthcare, culture, education, etc.

You said that you will run independently in all future elections. What do you think about the idea of ​​unifying the so-called pro-Montenegrin bloc?

By unifying the Montenegrin bloc - I do not consider Montenegrin in a national sense, but in a state-building sense. We embarked on the story of the European Union precisely to unite under one platform all those who want to advocate for the foundations of the values ​​of this society - a civic, secular and anti-fascist concept, a concept of progressive development, and not a concept of retrogradeness, historical revisionism.

We should focus on the present so that people can live as well as possible now and create a quality foundation for an even better future. That is the essence of the program framework in which we want to move. The modalities of running in elections - there will always be talk about that, but when we formed the European Union, we really wanted it to be an offer that would be able to bring together as many quality people as possible, that is, people who want the best for this society and country.

Why didn't you support DPS and withdraw from parliamentary committees after the adoption of amendments to the law on the National Security Agency and Internal Affairs?

On the one hand, you have this formal progress towards the European Union (EU), which each of us welcomes and we contribute to making it happen as quickly as possible. However, on the other hand, you have numerous challenges when it comes to the essence of the progress of society. The point is that under the guise of European integration, the majority, unfortunately, is implementing a different agenda in practice. The irresponsibility of the majority is evident, which instead of shaping the dialogue, it simulates it, instead of accelerating the necessary systemic and structural reforms, it fakes them.

The amendments to the security law had serious elements of unconstitutionality and did not follow European standards. At that time, my colleagues from DPS, I respect that, left the leadership positions they had in parliament in the area of ​​EU integration in order to show that the situation in that process was not regular and that democracy was being simulated.

The European Union acts as a separate political entity and makes its own decisions. The committee I chair, which deals with the economy, finance and budget, and the committee on which my colleague (Nikola) Zirojevic deputy president, and covers the security segment, these are still committees that focus on everyday challenges of society. That is why we believed that the opposition should not hand over that part of the control mechanism to the authorities. Time has shown that our decision to have the opposition retain the control mechanism in these committees is correct, because the authorities are doing everything they can to destroy the control mechanisms available to the opposition and to prevent numerous important topics from being raised. It is certainly good that colleagues from the DPS and other opposition parties participate in the work of the aforementioned committees as their members.

How do you view the opposition's actions in the past two and a half years, given that some analysts believe that you missed many chances to take more effective steps, given that the government made many bad decisions?

I am not someone who should evaluate the actions of other opposition entities. We in the European Union are trying to highlight all the challenges facing society, to propose concrete solutions to overcome numerous socio-economic challenges, and to point out numerous examples of unprincipledness, ignorance, and bad intentions on the part of the government that came on the wave of populism, which, mixed with nationalism, can have long-term consequences for society.

It seems to me that we have managed to uncover the core of the majority's actions, which is the interest part around the armchair trade, and secondly, to break down the manipulative image of an embellished reality that is being promoted by the majority.

Did we need to strengthen other forms of pressure on the government at certain times, I mean primarily non-institutional pressure? Of course we did, that's what we should have done differently now that we look at things, but I think we also managed to stop some of the majority's aspirations regarding constitutional amendments and encroachment on serious and sensitive matters.

Everyone has the right to assess the actions of the opposition, as far as the European Union is concerned - I can say that I am to a significant extent satisfied with our work... We analyze our behavior every day and listen to what citizens tell us, and we really try to accept all those well-intentioned suggestions and criticisms.

You have spoken several times in and outside parliament about the stability of public finances. Are they sustainable in the way they are currently managed?

First of all, we have a continuously inadequate economic model. This economic model constantly boils down to the fact that 90 or so percent of the budget is spending, less than 10 percent is the capital or development budget. This is not just a problem of this government, but it has been a problem for decades, and this government has made it even more problematic, because it has additionally increased the spending segment of the budget.

We have reached a point where the budget depends almost exclusively on taxes, and on the other hand, we have done nothing to improve the quality of the economy. All of this has resulted in huge borrowing, an ever-larger foreign trade deficit, and slowed economic growth.

Nothing is being done to build the necessary consensus, or rather a high level of agreement on how Montenegro should develop in the next 10, 20 years, because every time a new government comes in, it says: "Nothing the previous one did is good, we are starting from scratch". There is no work on diversifying the economy, improving its competitiveness, productivity; our economy cannot be so dependent on tourism, or what I call the sun and snow economy. We are just a short distance away from being part of the EU, that huge common market, you can imagine our economic entities when they face that huge competition, a market with hundreds of millions of citizens and a huge number of economic entities.

The Fiscal Council is one of the legal control mechanisms that should analyze and control the stability of public finances. It is also a benchmark for closing Chapter 17, and the government has been obstructing its formation for over three years. Why? Because, first of all, they do not like someone to independently control the public finance system. On the other hand, they want to politicize every institution that is elected in parliament, and then, unfortunately, the Fiscal Council is also a subject of intra-party coalition calculations.

Improvisation in the Assembly to the detriment of parliamentary integrity

What is your view on the organization of the Assembly sessions - from the way sessions are scheduled, to voting on the agenda, to the inability to adequately prepare due to the large number of laws...?

There is classic improvisation on stage, unfortunately, to the detriment of the integrity of parliament.

From the way the session is scheduled to the fact that the start of the sessions is delayed by three or four hours without any notice, to the fact that the existing majority immediately used the Rules of Procedure to destroy the control mechanisms available to the opposition, to the relationship of the executive branch to the obligations in parliament, to the fact that appointments in all bodies are reduced to trade between constituents, to the fact that there is no substantive dialogue with the opposition, that it has been simulated all this time, to the fact that the opposition is called to dialogue only when the numbers of opposition MPs are needed to vote on certain laws and for certain appointments...

I believe that this "wave of wandering" will pass, that after 2027, order will be restored to the political scene. And that is precisely why the European Union has embarked on the formation of this non-partisan programmatic-political story in order to restore order to the political scene and achieve the necessary political stability, as well as create a government from those constituents who truly want Montenegro to be a European state of progressive character.

I support the union's demands for OKU, the government's irresponsible approach

You have submitted an initiative to hear Minister Naida Nišić and Minister Novica Vuković regarding the situation regarding the General Collective Agreement (GCA). How do you view this situation and do you support the union's demands regarding the increase in the calculation value of the coefficient from 90 to 100 euros, which would affect the growth of wages by 10 percent?

And here we witness the irresponsible approach of the executive branch. It is inappropriate to have a situation where the General Labor Code does not exist, where the labor rights of a significant number of employees are not protected by this type of document, where agreements with social partners are ignored, and on the other hand, where the cost of living is drastically increasing.

I support the demands for a correction of the calculation value of the coefficients, which have been at the same level since 2013, and I believe that the agreement could go towards the phased implementation of the union's demands. Of course, I also support the correction of the complexity coefficient, because certain ad hoc economic measures that were not comprehensive have created injustice in the relationships between certain earnings.

You said you support the union's demands. If that's the case, why weren't you at the protest organized in front of the government on April 29th?

My principle, precisely so that this story would not be politicized, so that the government would not use it to say that we in the opposition want to politicize this story, I did not attend. As you stated, I initiated the holding of a parliamentary hearing of the relevant ministers, for which I also proposed the presence of representatives of the employee unions and employers' associations in order to publicly cross-examine all the arguments.

Who is in a fight in Montenegro that politicians are trying to reconcile?

DPS leader Danijel Živković recently said in an interview with “Vijesti” that the party believes that the time has come to “overcome the Montenegrin-Serbian gap.” Do you think that the time has come for that, and would it be “healthy” for the state to have a coalition of Montenegrins and Serbs in power?

I think that the phrase about reconciliation is very often misused in public discourse by some constituents of the majority. I ask the question - who is at odds in Montenegro that politicians should reconcile. I do not want politicians to constantly send messages that citizens are at odds, because I believe they are not.

I also ask citizens not to allow politicians to argue with them. The story of reconciliation has ended with the government's constituents being appeased by various privileges.

We must not become a state of people, which is unfortunately what some political entities strive for, because civic Montenegro has no alternative. It is unacceptable that some local governments celebrate holidays of other countries, and not national holidays of Montenegro. It is unacceptable that things are done that try to change the character of society, invent our history and glorify retrograde ideologies. These are things about which there is no compromise with us and it is not a matter of reconciliation, but of a civilizational view of the basic values ​​of society.