The cut was made a year ago: in the 2019 legislatures, the PCP lost around 115,000 votes and five MPs. The poor electoral result seems to prove that those within the party criticize the support of the Communists for the PS government and accuse the leadership of forming false alliances. Indeed, the central committee, meeting after the elections, accused “certain ex-members of the party” of having, by leading “a long and systematic directed against” the PCP, to have contributed to the electoral defeat. Four years of “machinery” have had bad results for the PCP. It must have been on this day – a year ago – that the central committee swore not to be involved in another.
The Communist vote against the supplementary budget was the first episode of the new series. The problem now is semiotic: the PCP will vote against, even if it goes all the way to show “what matters” and that is how it always acted in the “gadgets” of the past. But it is evident that the specifications laid out by João Oliveira in the middle of the week – with the ban on layoffs, namely, something that even the PCP itself could not fulfill when it closed companies. in its orbit – is unlikely to be accepted by the government. Indeed, unlike what happened in the era of the “machinery”, where the PCP accepted that the PS continue to respect European commitments, this time João Oliveira demanded from the government “a response with political options. clear and decided, according to solutions which genuinely respond to national problems and not according to criteria imposed on the country by the European Union and the interests of economic groups ”. João Oliveira has tried to say that “these have always been the criteria of the PCP” for the past four years, but this is not true: the PCP has made budgets achievable which included measures “according to imposed criteria by the European Union ”. In fact, in the “contraption” agreements, the PCP admitted that the government met the “criteria”.
With the “fall” of the PCP and – with a crisis at the door – the Communists deciding to take up the challenge, the position of the Left Bloc becomes more difficult. Negotiations between the government and the blockers will likely end in a good port, but at the moment it’s unclear how. The Bloc’s refusal of the PS solution for the new bank (“going into deficit”) did not deserve words of socialist sympathy.
The PCP already has a “free hand”, even if all the free time of the Communists is now devoted to the semiotic effort: to explain that nothing has changed compared to the first legislature. Which is not true. Everything has changed and the PCP has returned to its starting point: refusing agreements with the “bourgeoisie”. The presidential elections will be the test of this new position.