Back

Members of Parliament as wastrels and agents of the interests of the least productive

The elections are important for a million reasons, one of which is the kind of people we send to parliament, because they have taken the country into their own hands. If, six or seven years ago, the parliament was seen as a rubber stamp for the administration, with bureaucrats drafting policy proposals and MPs having no real influence, this is no longer the case. On the contrary, MPs are actively loading the budget with new expenses, making highly lobbyist-driven decisions for specific groups/businesses, without any concern for how this affects the state budget or the overall macroeconomic situation in the country.

Here are some examples [1] of decisions from recent parliaments:

  • New rule for salaries in the Ministry of Interior (Amendment to the Ministry of Interior Act, February 2024)
    The total salary expenses in the Ministry of Interior, which exceed 2.5 billion BGN in 2024, are expected to increase by 40-50%, which means an additional 1.2 billion BGN for 2025.
  • New rule for salaries in the Ministry of Defense (Amendment to the Defense and Armed Forces Act, April 2024)
    The total salary expenses in the Ministry of Defense, exceeding 1.7 billion BGN in 2024, are expected to increase by 30-50%, which means an additional 500-600 million BGN for 2025.
  • New rule for expenses in higher education (Amendment to the Higher Education Act, March 2024)
    The funds from the state budget for financing higher education are planned annually to be no less than 0,9% of GDP (Article 90a), which amounts to nearly 2 billion BGN for 2025.

What does the Ministry of Finance do?

It observes from the sidelines and shrugs, but not only that. When billions of BGN in additional spending are voted, the Minister of Finance proposes raising social security contributions and tax amnesty, for example. While the Ministry of Finance cannot limit the legislative initiative of parliamentarians, it can, in the current situation, propose spending cuts or even the cancellation of voted increases. One might ask: why does someone vote and then another proposes a cancellation? The simple answer is because there is no money. The more profound answer would be because the aforementioned increases were adopted under brutal lobbying by the least productive and/or reform-resistant groups. Just as billions in spending can be approved at the last minute, they can also be proposed for cancellation at the last minute.

The legislative process takes place in Parliament, which has the sovereign right to decide on taxes, expenses, and debts. But this does not negate economic logic and arithmetic – that is why ideas and proposals should come from the executive branch, or at least be analyzed and incorporated into the broader framework of governance and public finances, following the entire cycle – from identifying the problem, formulating alternative solutions, through public consultations, and specific calculations of costs and benefits. This is how it works in countries with less legislative inflation, greater stability, predictability, and expertise in policymaking.

[1]See more in IME’s Recommendations for Budget 2025.– https://ime.bg/articles/preporykite-na-ipi-za-byudzhet-2025/


Related publications.