In the course of last year, we came across some highly negative trends which demand not only to be acknowledged but for some action to be taken against them.

There was deep apathy (showed by voters) and extremely low turnouts in the two elections (the May 20 MEP elections and the October 28 municipal elections). The alienation and apathy that citizens showed towards the institutions and political parties reached a critical level. With every passing day, the debate in Bulgarian politics - and I believe I am not the only one to share this opinion - is becoming more and more about parties' problems and about personal issues.

I ask myself: Is this the future of Bulgarian political debate? The trust people have in the parties is in contrast to the growing number of parties. I no longer know the number, more than 300 perhaps.

It is a common opinion, which I share as well, that corruption in political life is still present despite efforts to limit it. The lack of stability and principles in the electoral legislation and process adds to the impression that citizens no longer feel represented by the institutions. That's why I think that changes in the quality and organisation of the electoral process are highly necessary in order to restore people's trust in politics.

There should be changes to the electoral system, to the way that referendums work and to the law on political parties.

The electoral system
The first thing we should do is to affirm the principles of majority elections within a mixed electoral system. I think that would bring back people's trust in government and would add to the legitimacy of the electoral bodies. People want to elect personalities rather than "used" or discredited politicians who have taken cover in parties' proportional election lists.

A mixed electoral system would minimise the possibilities for electoral abuses, the buying of votes. It would also limit the influence of local populist parties, that we have all seen emerging at the municipal elections.

The tendency of the "ruling majority being elected by electoral minorities" should be brought to an end. To this end, we need to introduce three elements: direct election of candidates, preferential vote, and setting an electoral threshold.

I am ready to propose to Parliament to hold a referendum on introducing a mixed electoral system.

We should also expand the impact of "direct democracy". It is not normal that Bulgaria is the only EU member that has not had a referendum in the past 19 years. If Parliament refuses to do so, I am ready to collect the needed signatures from people and organise one according to the law.

The criteria for registering a political party should be changed as well. These changes would guarantee that parties are under the control of society and would guarantee genuine political representation in the country. We must raise the criteria for the minimum number of party members required for registering a party. Parties should have branches in at least two-thirds of municipalities in order to be registered and to avoid the existence of parties with unclear political goals. A new electoral threshold could be introduced as well. For example, if a party fails to gather 0.5 to one per cent of the vote in several successive elections, it would be automatically disbanded. That way, we would have not 300, but 20 functioning parties. A new Political Parties Act could introduce drastic changes leading to transparency and order in party financing, a complete ban on donations from legal entities, placing donations from individuals under much stricter control, and increasing the state subsidies for the parties which meet the legal requirements. I know that some will be against the idea of using more state money to finance parties, but I assure you that this would be far cheaper than admitting to power parties indebted to business entities. For a businessman it will be more expensive to buy 50 or 100 MPs than to buy a party leadership.

Presidential powers
I have said in a number of times that there should be a change to the powers of the President. The President should be given the right to hold a national referendum. To do this, the constitution needs to be changed because at present the President can ask for referendum but cannot organise one. I will come up with a formal proposal for a referendum on constitutional matters concerning the presidential powers, but will do this in the second half of my term to avoid suspicion that I have some personal motive, that I would take advantage of it during my incumbency.

I want to remind you one of my previous ideas regarding the powers of the President. There is no logic in the current situation when the Presidential veto can be overruled by the same number of votes with which a bill has been adopted by MPs. The presidential veto should be overruled by a larger majority than the 50 per cent plus 1 vote required by the constitution.

I ask for this because we have witnessed time and again in all Parliaments, this one included, cases of business lobbying that puts personal interest ahead of national ones. If the President has more powers in this area, I think that MPs would be more careful.

I would very much like the President to have the right to initiate legislation, but I will not ask for that because I trust my experts who say this would be tantamount to a confusion of the powers of the various branches of government and could block interaction among the institutions.

I know that many surveys say that people support a presidential republic, but I remain a firm supporter of a parliamentary republic.
I am not in favour of reducing the number of MPs from the current 240. I realise that such a reduction would lessen the parliamentary representation of the Bulgarian people. Again, I will not back the idea of compulsory voting, because it could easily bring forth "political freaks". If we force people to vote, then we would not know what their reaction might be. We must look for ways to motivate voters other than forcing them.

The energy sector
When beginning my second term in office, I said that my priorities included developing Bulgaria as an energy, transport and communication centre in the Balkans. In the past year and the past 10 days, our efforts in this direction were, I would say, very successful. We are on the way to regain our role as a key energy factor.

Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev has already listed how Bulgaria will benefit from the agreements with Russia in the energy sector. I will mention some of them. More than 5.5 billion euro will be invested directly in the Bulgarian economy. This has never happened before. This is a chance for Bulgarian constriction companies and workers as well. Foreign investors will also have a stronger interest in our economy. Let's not forget the security issue as well.

Bulgaria is not Russia's Trojan Horse in the EU, because the EU is not Troy and is not surrounded. The EU is open to co-operation. After all, the energy projects in question are European because they involve EU countries such as Greece, Italy and France. I want to ask how the South Stream pipeline is less European than North Stream?

As for the Bourgas-Alexandroupolis oil pipeline. I promise to do everything possible to guarantee that the environment is 100 per cent preserved. I want to say something about the referendum on the pipeline scheduled in Bourgas for February. We can't have local referendums deciding issues concerning the entire country. Imagine if we ask people in Belene about nuclear energy and if they refuse to have a nuclear power plant in Belene, what we should do then?

What if people in Souhodol say no in a referendum to Sofia's refuse, what will the Government do then?

Bulgaria should take the initiative to develop and implement the Nabucco natural gas pipeline project. I personally will join in the efforts through a series of meetings with the countries involved.

We should continue our efforts to persuade our EU partners of the need to restore to operation units 3 and 4 of Kozloduy nuclear power station.

However, I oppose the idea of opening the units on our own, because we have signed the EU treaty which should be respected.

Holding a referendum on the two units is a not a good idea either, because you can't have a referendum about expert issues such as the safety of the units. We need professional arguments if we want to convince our EU partners, and the only thing we can do is to request a new peer review of the safety of the units.

Kosovo
Bulgaria will not be among the countries that will immediately recognise Kosovo as independent. Bulgaria is working on a coherent European position on the matter.

Macedonia
As you know, Bulgaria was the first country to recognise independent Macedonia under its constitutional name, Republic of Macedonia. We have always supported Macedonia's EU future, but this support is not unconditional. The claims to Bulgaria history should be put to an end. We see such claims coming from circles known to be close to the official ones. The encouragement of separatist tendencies in the Pirin area should also be put to an end, and we want to see signs of increasing closeness.

Tatyana Boroudhizeva, political scientist, as quoted by commercial Nova Televisia
"Personally I did not understand what Purvanov wanted to say. He talked about so many things that it is difficult to see what his main message was. This was not a report on what he had done in the first year of his second term, as the event was advertised. The idea of asking parties to have branches in two-thirds of the municipalities is a radical one. There cannot be limitations imposed on the democratic process."

Antonii Gulubov, sociologist, as quoted by Focus news agency
"For me the speech was a sign that Purvanov wants to play a more decisive role in Bulgarian politics. This is beyond doubt. The time of the event was not picked by chance. It is obvious that Purvanov is trying to send messages to the ruling majority, the opposition and the public in general.
The event had a lot to do with the signing of the agreements with Russia and the crisis in the ruling majority.
Lately, Purvanov sounds more like a commentator of the political process rather than a key figure that uses the powers of the President's institution. He spoke little of the reform of the army and the national security issues where he has real powers, and spoke more of issues where the Presidency has little if any jurisdiction. It is not up to the President to decide how many parties there should be in Bulgaria."

Zhelyu Zhelev, President of Bulgaria 1990-1997, as quoted by Nova
"I support the idea of the President having more powers in legislation. From my experience, I know that the President should have the right to propose bills, or at least his veto should not be that easily overruled."