The vote of no confidence.

Today, there are a lot of variety of professional terms in which the person who is not well received in a certain social circle is very difficult to understand.After all, most of them have foreign roots of its origin (mostly originated in Latin).Therefore, without narrow-profile professional knowledge to decipher the term can be very difficult or almost impossible.One such unusual expressions is "a vote of confidence."And if the second word in this case does not cause any problems, then here is the first familiar not every second citizen of our country.But such a notion is very closely linked to the political life of the Russian state.It has repeatedly figured in the chaotic "Ninety" and even once was tabled persons occupying one of the highest posts in the country.What is a vote of confidence?Let's look at that phrase in more detail and to look at the reliability of the historical facts.

In fact, the term translates as an expression of distrust.If we consider just the political sphere of its application, it will focus on the removal of the leading statesmen of the government.The vote of no confidence - it is an expression of their negative opinion about the work directly himself head of state and parliament.In both cases, the authorities should resign.In addition, to be announced early elections so that the country did not have a free government.

in our state this phenomenon was noted several times.However, it is never a vote of confidence in the government was not approved.All limited offer.The State Duma in 1995 as many as three times to make such a decision.However, the final confirmation during the re-vote was announced and was not.The media began to use the term in their professional vocabulary in 1989.The reason was a publication in a very popular at the time the magazine "Ogonyok", which used the phrase, mentions a vote of no confidence.As the procedure for dismissal of officials from his work, the term was first performed by Anatoly Sobchak in 1990.Of course, such a reaction was to be expected, since that era was full of contradictions.The economy was going through a major crisis, the overall situation in the country is rapidly deteriorating and it was highly unstable.However, whenever a vote of no confidence dangerously hanging over the government of the state, something stopped political leaders from making a final decision.

In any case, even if the resignation was no such protest was a clear sign that something must be radically changed.The vote of confidence - a kind of indication that the policies specified for the current period, has become obsolete and does not bring anything good to the state.Thus, the manifestation of discontent suggests that in the near future if the situation in the country does not improve, then all the leaders lose their authority.

However, this is not the only aspect of the Russian state.Other parliamentary countries also had to deal with in my practice a similar phenomenon.Moreover, even modern politics is sometimes very close to the no-confidence their government.Consequently, this concept does not have a statute of limitations, and has not lost its relevance today.Even the current leader Vladimir Putin in 2005, had to face a vote.The reason was the positive decision on the project monetization population.Representatives of the political party the Communist Party were extremely unhappy and outraged by this law.Their opinions have supported massive social unrest.The result was a manifestation of confidence in the government of the country.However, as you can see in person, the resignation was not followed.The proposal did not receive sufficient support.