The prime minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, speaking in the Plenary of the Parliament, launched an attack on the opposition and especially on PASOK, over its stance in the discussion on the constitutional revision.
At the same time, he sharply criticized the minority parties for their announcements at the TIF, while once again raising the dilemmas of the upcoming ballot.
“There would be no reason for the Constitution to provide for a double vote, if the legislator did not envisage that a different result might possibly emerge in the second vote. I am afraid that this is not very likely. The point would be to show which changes Parliament could promote in order to improve our Constitution. Our central goal is for the country to acquire a modern Constitution that will keep pace with the times, making the state more effective and consolidating transparency as a link of trust with the citizens. The first vote revealed the dead-end tactic of the opposition”, Mr. Mitsotakis noted.
“Even forces that present themselves as supposedly serious or responsible submitted to the blind ‘no’ or the awkward ‘yes, but’ - especially Mr. Androulakis’s PASOK. The Constitution gives the possibility for an expanded majority to be explored even in the first Parliament. You say ‘yes, we may agree, but we will not give you a blank check’. It is your admission that ND will be the first party and will win the elections”, the prime minister stressed.
Mr. Mitsotakis recalled the corresponding discussion on the constitutional revision of 1999-2001, underlining: “We will ascertain that its success depends mainly on the stance of the official opposition. Back then ND, in two consecutive Parliaments, behaved with great responsibility. Why are you not in a position to do so today?
It sounds absurd for the two systemic parties not to cooperate at least, for example, so that the operation of non-state universities is constitutionally guaranteed and so that the performance of public employees is linked to evaluation. You vote these down, as well as a mature demand, the substantive change of Article 86 so that political figures are investigated by justice and not by Parliament. We could solve these issues now, but you choose to postpone them indefinitely”.
The prime minister also denounced the right-wing parties that “vote against the constitutional safeguarding of the Greek flag and the Greek language”.
He also underlined “the political weight of this session. The present Parliament chooses the articles under revision and the next one shapes their final content. Whoever votes ‘no’ or ‘present’, in practice will have deprived the country of the opportunity to move more quickly into tomorrow. I am afraid that on the part of all parties, this is yet another choice of nihilism toward everything, as the recent experience from the TIF showed. The citizen saw on the one hand a clear government plan for 2027 leading to 2030 with measures included in an implementation calendar month by month, costed down to the last euro”.
Two sides
On the other hand, as he said, there is “a recycling of uncosted and often contradictory promises with two sides: the Androulakis logic of ‘take it, people’ and the Tsipras side which used to be called ‘illusion’ and today returns as fraud, who, speaking sometimes in terms of a year and sometimes of a four-year term, has confused even his own officials.
Citizens understand that whoever promises them tax cuts and spending increases leads the country to bankruptcy. PASOK and SYRIZA are two sides of the same coin, and however much you try in your informal competition with each other to differentiate yourselves, you have both adopted the worst practices of the past”.
The prime minister stressed that “it matters little whether ND’s opponents want or plan to cooperate, within a nightmarish scenario of turmoil and ungovernability. To align, possibly, with the extremes of populism. Today, Greece needs more than ever stability, continuity and consistency, but also institutional normality: the sincerity of ‘I say it and I mean it’, instead of the others’ ‘I say it and take it back’. That is why those who had predicted early elections are now being disproved.
Just think if we were now in a pre-election period, with oil on the rise, with two wars underway, Europe in embarrassment and with an unprecedented crisis in the global bond market. The fact that Greece is a beacon of stability vindicates our choice to repay the public debt more quickly”.
This winter, Mr. Mitsotakis estimated, “will be difficult. In the name of this circumstance, however, my choice will never be to put party interest above the interest of my homeland. And on the contrary, I believe that internal developments must be determined under conditions of calm and on the basis of each person’s ability.
We will continue our work with the immediate goal that the benefits of a constructive policy gradually return to society as a development dividend, without putting at risk our achievements so far”.
The reply
In his reply, the prime minister, addressing Nikos Androulakis, stated:
“If, Mr. Androulakis, you were so sure that you would win the elections, today you would at least vote for the changes to Article 86, so that you could then shape it as you wish, as a majority in Parliament.
You said something that one could regard as nationally dangerous. You said that the dilemma in the elections is ‘Mitsotakis or Erdogan’. No, the dilemma will be ‘Mitsotakis or Androulakis, Mitsotakis or Tsipras, Mitsotakis or Konstantopoulou, Mitsotakis or Velopoulos’. That is the dilemma of the next elections.
The fact that you mean that the government chooses to increase tension in Greek-Turkish relations in order to gain some benefits, this view is nationally dangerous”.
And the prime minister continued, addressing the president of PASOK: “Do you really believe that a responsible government could ever pursue a long-term foreign policy and put the country’s interests at risk, just because in a few months we will have elections? The government will continue to defend the national interests and protect our borders, throughout the four-year term, as we have done until now.
Do not mix external issues into domestic political confrontation. It shows irresponsibility; withdraw it in your reply, you have a responsible role that does not allow you to leave such insinuations. As for Mr. Floridis, whom you mentioned, he will send you a bouquet for the free advertising”.