During his interview on the program “Atairiastoi” with Ch. Koutras and G. Ntsounos on SKAI, the President of PASOK-Movement for Change, Nikos Androulakis, described the Movement’s different plan to increase wealth production in the country.
“After the Recovery Fund, Greece will enter into adventures if we do not have another productive model and another policy. We must invest in a different productive base, which will not be real estate -selling off our properties and showing growth-, and revenues must not be based on indirect taxes which are dependent on inflation that rises with high prices. We have another vision for a productive model that will be linked to the primary sector, manufacturing and a modern value-added tourism,” he noted.
As for the costing of the measures with a fiscal footprint that he announced at the TIF (gradual payment of the 13th salary, payment in two installments of the 13th pension, new EKAS, abolition of the business tax, indexation of the tax scale and annual child benefit for 3 years), Mr. Androulakis explained:
“In a PASOK government, in the first year the total cost of the measures is 1 billion 370 million euros and the net expenditure 1.2 billion. In the fourth year, when the last installment of the 13th pension and the 13th salary also intervenes, it is 3.8 billion, that is a net 3.1 billion.
When Mr. Mitsotakis went to the TIF in 2018 and was in my position -I brought it up as an example yesterday in Parliament as well-, he promised abolition of the Katrougalos law and a horizontal reduction of VAT from 24% to 22% and from 13% to 11%; did you ask him how much his program cost? Do you remember what he told you? He never said. They were saying whatever came into their heads. And that is why they did not do them.”
Asked about the evaluation of the parties’ pre-election programs by the Fiscal Council, Mr. Androulakis pointed out that “the Fiscal Council of course must examine the programs of all parties,” but he also raised an important dimension, that of the evaluation and impact of each measure on the economy and society.
The President of PASOK deconstructed the government’s dilemma “Mitsotakis or chaos” but also, as described by the Minister of Justice, speaking of a “raid from the others,” if New Democracy is not re-elected.
“One day they say ‘Mitsotakis or Chaos’, the next they say ‘Mitsotakis or Erdogan’, the third they say ‘Hope or Adventure’. That is, we are the ‘adventure’ and New Democracy is the ‘hope’. Hope in rents? Hope in health? Hope in education? Where have they given hope? When the people have the lowest purchasing power in Europe, what is their success?”, he wondered caustically.
“In the field of high prices, New Democracy did not set rules. It used high prices to generate revenues and to make passes and favors,” Mr. Androulakis said and added regarding the government argument that high prices in fuel and food are a problem faced by other European countries as well:
“I have the list here. Excise Duty on unleaded: We are 5th. Netherlands, Denmark, Italy, Ireland, Greece. Do we have the same purchasing power as these countries?”
As for the real stake of the ballot box, Mr. Androulakis pointed out that “the Greek people in a few months will assess whether this government should have a third term, with the corruption that exists today, the impunity, the problems in the state.
For me, in the next elections the vision for tomorrow and the results of government policy will be judged. We believe that government policy has failed. We have the vision, the plan and the political personnel. And we also have something more: We have no dependencies. We will make the clashes and implement this policy.”
Referring to the pathologies of the state and how its operation must meet the requirements of transparency and effectiveness, he gave two examples:
“Zoonoses: 600,000 animals have been slaughtered, while at the same time no policies are being implemented to replace livestock capital. Was this the first time we had foot-and-mouth disease in Greece? No, but there were serious control mechanisms from the competent ministry that limited the zoonosis to a small area and there was no such spread throughout Greece.
We are all talking about the center where Giorgos Mazonakis lost his life. I heard the competent minister say that there are state responsibilities and that perhaps we should create a ‘Health Rambo’ corps to carry out inspections. He did not say, however, that there was a body of health services inspectors established by PASOK with minister Alekos Papadopoulos and abolished by New Democracy under Kyriakos Mitsotakis.
Therefore, when you abolish or undermine and degrade the state’s control mechanisms, you give room to fraudsters, to sly people, to middlemen, to multinationals to offer bad services, to make the life of the Greek people very expensive. Therefore, for me the issue at stake is the state”.
Regarding the constitutional revision, the President of PASOK responded to those who raise the argument about the irresponsible stance of the official opposition.
“I was hearing on news bulletins analysts wondering: ‘Is PASOK irresponsible? Did it not support the constitutional revision? Since they agreed to change Article 86, why did they say no?’. If I ask 100 citizens, all 100 will tell us to change Article 86. But is New Democracy changing it? No. And with the revision it proposes, the final say belongs to the parliamentary majority. So, what did they ask me to agree to? To agree, that is, to remain the same.
Second argument: If I take 100 citizens outside SKAI and ask them: ‘Do you want the leadership of justice to be appointed by the Prime Minister and the government or do you favor PASOK’s proposal for it to come from a broader body consisting of the bar associations, the law schools, the judiciary and MPs from all parties?’. I think all 100 would agree that the Prime Minister should not appoint the leadership of justice. What does New Democracy propose in the revision? That it be appointed by the parliamentary majority, therefore again Mitsotakis or the next one.
Here, therefore, a game of impressions is being played, in a systematic way, where many commentators instead of telling the plain truth, whenever it concerns New Democracy, play it down. Because the Constitution is not a partial issue but a central one, PASOK went with its proposals, with its positions, because New Democracy did not want any change. It wants things to remain as they are and I think that the two emblematic examples I gave are clear”
In closing, Mr. Androulakis noted:
“The issue of ungovernability and lack of stability is used by every government shortly before elections. That is, it says: ‘close your eyes to corruption, to high prices, and, because we will not have a government, give us one more chance’. How many do they want? Mr. Tsipras had two, Mr. Mitsotakis had two. Do they want a third chance as well? We saw how well that went for us.
The country must not go backward. It must move forward. PASOK has a program, it has cadres, it also has independence from interests, so that we can create better conditions in citizens’ lives. This is, for me, political change. It is not alternation in positions of power.
I am not fighting for power. I am fighting for political change. Therefore, to use the power that the Greek people will give us to make Greece a modern European country, with institutions, with the rule of law, with a welfare state, with real development.”
“Only if PASOK comes first can there be political change. Because, if it is not first, mathematically there is no possibility of forming a government that leads New Democracy into opposition. So let us speak honestly to the citizens. I am claiming first place, because it is the only way for New Democracy to leave and for us to change policy.
In the scenario where New Democracy has as its opponent Mr. Tsipras’s party, it will be a very easy scenario for it, because it will go and compare itself with yesterday. So this is also its plan. To do what it did in 2023. Instead of apologizing for its actions, to say: ‘ah, okay, we made a mess of it, but they made an even worse mess of it’.
That is why I stress that there is no need for a comparison over who was the worst. What is needed is the comparison over who has the best program, the best political personnel and the best vision for the country,” he concluded.