Opposition proposes new law to improve miners’ pensions
Jorida Tabaku, an MP from the Democratic Party, has introduced a new law aimed at increasing miners’ pensions. Supported by opposition colleagues, the proposal seeks to address long-standing dissatisfaction with the current pension scheme, which many argue has failed to meet miners’ needs.
Why is this important: For decades, miners have felt abandoned by consecutive governments, that have promised pension reforms but failed to deliver meaningful changes especially as it pertains to miners. The current pensions—starting at 40,000 lek or 400 euros—are too low to meet basic living costs, especially with rising inflation. Many miners say they can no longer afford essentials, and this proposal aims to provide the financial relief they need while restoring fairness to the pension system.
What was said: Tabaku accused the government of offering only symbolic pension adjustments. “Miners were promised significant increases, but those promises turned out to be empty words,” she said. “They deserve more than token increases handed out for electoral gain.”
Proposal: The proposed law also challenges the government’s spending priorities, with the opposition criticizing the misuse of state funds. According to Tabaku, billions of lek have been allocated to PPPs and concession projects while miners continue to receive inadequate pensions.
Currently, over 1,000 miners receive pensions, and more than 13,000 hold official miner status. Inflation and rising living costs have further strained these pensioners, leaving many unable to make ends meet. The opposition argues that the new legislation would establish a fairer pension scheme that reflects the real value of miners’ contributions.
Lawmakers stress the importance of passing the bill without delay. “Miners cannot wait any longer,” Tabaku said. “They deserve fair pensions that match the realities of today’s economy and honor their years of hard work.”
Go deeper
Kosovo PM warns of Serbian aggression amid rising tensions and internal challenges
Published on November 22, 2024
Why is this important: Kurti’s statement underscores the enduring tensions in the Western Balkans where the dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo has practically been frozen. It also highlights Kosovo concerns over Serbia’s growing assertiveness. Framing Belgrade’s actions as a continuation of the “Greater Serbia” project, Kurti warned that Serbia poses a direct threat not only to Kosovo but also to the broader region, including Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro. The remarks are an attempt to mobilize international support. But they are also seen as an attempt by Kurti to rally his base and reinforce his nationalist credentials ahead of Kosovo’s 2025 elections, where he is considered the favorite despite an increasingly active opposition.
Albanian opposition announces November 26 protest against court ruling
Published on November 22, 2024
Why is this important: The Democratic Party’s (DP) decision to protest follows a ruling by the Constitutional Court that upheld the decision of the Special Structure Against Corruption and Organized Crime (SPAK) to bypass Parliament in enforcing measures against Berisha, including an obligation to appear before the prosecution and a travel ban. However, the Court deemed the travel ban imposed on Berisha as disproportionate. The decision to protest against the Constitutional Court ruling came as no surprise. DP and Berisha have a tradition of protesting against all court decisions that go against them.
President consults parties on election date amid Democratic Party boycott
Published on November 21, 2024
Why is this important: The election date is a constitutional prerogative of the President of the Republic. Traditionally, before announcing the date for parliamentary or local elections, the President consults with political parties, particularly those in Parliament, ensuring transparency and inclusivity in electoral planning. With no substantial disagreements, claims, or demands from parties regarding a specific election date, the DP’s refusal appears more as an attack on the President and an application of a traditional DP tactic of intimidating public officials by publicly accusing them of collusion with their opponents.