Thinking about the true motives come to only one conclusion: this was done in order to become "acceptable" to the ruling in the country to get "Consent" of the ruling coalition after the elections to the Seimas, in the following year.

I will mention only a few of the reasons why this seems wrong:

  • As practice shows, the success rate is not one who adapts to the other, and the one who has a strong position. You yourself repeatedly became the mayor of Riga without such "podstrani", and during the term of the agreement with "United Russia". Did not prevent a valid contract with "United Russia" and the ruling Centrist party of Estonia, and Chairman of the jüri Ratas, which became the Prime Minister of Estonia. Estonia this year — the country holding the presidency of the EU and all the EU leaders and the EU leadership did not hesitate that the party of the Prime Minister of this country has an agreement with the ruling party of Russia.
  • You, as an experienced politician, knows that the current ruling or spin-off from them a new batch, if you wish, you will always find a reason for refusal to participate in a coalition with the "Consent" without a Treaty with the "United Russia". When necessary, they will say the magic words: "hand of Moscow — never!" And, as the events of the previous years, this deep argument they had had enough. However, if their interests will be the creation of a coalition with the "Consent", they cooperate in the presence of any of the contract.
  • The "Consent" of such a contract is concluded with other foreign parties, for example, with the Communist party of China. As far as I know, this contract has to terminate not going to. It seems to me unclear why we should "be ashamed" and to terminate this agreement with the Russian party?
  • Unlike the party "Consent", which is not a full member of PES (Party of European socialists), and the only party observer, I as an MEP and member of the S&D group of the EP — had the exclusive opportunity to join the PES. And I took it — came into PES with the right to vote at any Convention. Neal, it is not necessary to neutralize a truly European democracy, the PES to the level of the Communist party or the workers ' Party of North Korea: nobody ever in PES will not require a waiver of friendship with neighbors. There is no "centralized common foreign policy of PES": there are different opinions, which are usually respected.

Be ashamed of your advantages nothing. "Consent" has always stressed the importance of dialogue with Russia. This was our strength. You can talk with Zhirinovsky, Zyuganov and even with the Bulk. But today in Russia on different levels it takes the "United Russia". To cut off this channel of influence for the benefit of Latvia short-sighted. For its position on Russia's "Consent" in previous elections has received support from voters