Dear friends, good day to you all!
There are election campaigns that begin with the announcement of the election. And there are those that start much earlier, even as everyone insists that… they haven’t started yet. It is clear that Greece finds itself in the latter situation today.
Kyriakos Mitsotakis has stated this repeatedly and in no uncertain terms: the government will serve out its full term.
At the same time, however, it is publishing a report on its seven years in office, the government is introducing one bill after another with provisions for debts and liabilities, the budget surplus has already been diverted to the Thessaloniki International Trade Fair for benefits, ministers and members of parliament are “crisscrossing” the country, New Democracy is preparing to announce new candidates, and the opposition is competing with its own announcements.
In other words, whether the government likes it or not, the country is already on a pre-election track.
Within the opposition, one party is outdoing the other with campaign promises. Nikos Androulakis is promising free public transportation for young people up to age 24, while Alexis Tsipras extends that promise to everyone; at the same time, the government denounces this “race to the bottom on handouts,” even as it prepares its own slate of announcements for the Thessaloniki International Fair.
And while the deputy prime minister assures that “we will not engage in a race to the bottom on handouts” and reiterates that the elections will take place on schedule, everyone is acting as if they are already in the home stretch toward the polls.
The question now is not whether early elections will be held. When the entire political system is operating in election mode, could it be that the only one who doesn’t believe the narrative about serving out the full four-year term is… the government itself?
A prime minister who publishes a seven-year report, presents the commitments that have been fulfilled, and lays out the narrative for the next term can hardly convince anyone that he hasn’t already begun counting down to the polls—even if the election is held months later.
The issue, of course, is not whether the elections will take place in October, December, or the spring of 2027. The issue is that governance seems to have given way to pre-election preparations.
Instead of the government throwing itself headlong into the work of tackling inflation, absorbing Recovery Fund resources in a timely manner, and correcting the state’s chronic problems, it is wasting its time on tours, project presentations, and public relations.
In the ministries, the familiar logic of election seasons is increasingly prevailing: “put the pencils down.” Everyone is thinking about the next election, and very few are thinking about the next reform.
They were not elected, however, to campaign for months on end. They were elected to govern.
Have everyday problems been addressed? Have inflation and profiteering been substantially curbed? Has it become easier for young people to find housing? Has bureaucracy been reduced? Has anyone attempted to determine how much time even a seemingly simple real estate transfer still takes today? Has the administration of justice truly been expedited?
These are—among many others—the questions on citizens’ minds.
If, ultimately, the government considers political stability to be its greatest asset, then it must act accordingly.
Stability is not compatible with the constant “torture by drops” surrounding the election schedule.
If decisions have been made, let them be clearly stated. If not, then let them govern until the very last day of their term, rather than keeping the country in a perpetual pre-election limbo.
We live in a democracy, and the elections, when they take place, will last just one day. The breakdown of governance, however, could last for months—especially if a second round of voting is held. And that is the real problem.