Harsh criticism of the government for its policy toward Armed Forces personnel was exercised by PASOK MP and head of the National Defence Sector of the party, Michalis Katrinis, speaking at the Parliament’s Defence and Foreign Affairs Committee.
He stressed that the country requires its personnel to train continuously, to assume responsibility for extremely expensive and complex weapons systems, to relocate together with their families, and to be ready whenever needed. In the face of these demands, the State must make use of their knowledge, respect their contribution, and give them reasons to remain in service and a prospect for their future.
Michalis Katrinis denounced the violent disruption of the career path of serving non-commissioned officers, their rank stagnation, and the devaluation of people who have supported the operation of the units for decades. He accused the government of retroactively overturning the rules under which these people chose to serve, drastically limiting their prospects for advancement and weakening the incentives for them to remain, without an adequate transitional period.
He referred to the complaints of military associations about resignations even from units operating the newest weapons systems, about departures from the schools, and about retroactive cuts to mission compensation.
He pointed out that the government had been warned that the downgrading of non-commissioned officers would burden morale, strengthen tendencies toward departure, and further damage the attractiveness of military schools. He recalled that his question, submitted more than three months ago, remains unanswered, in which he requests data on departures, vacant positions in the schools, and the factors affecting a service member’s decision to stay or leave.
He also called for a specific legislative solution to the rank injustice suffered by non-commissioned officers who enlisted in 1992 and 1993, on which he had submitted a question on June 16. “You owe them a clear answer and a solution, not an answer that merely invokes the existing framework,” he stressed.
Finally, he was particularly sharp also regarding military housing. He asked the government to present the results of its housing policy and to explain why the new body for the utilization of military property remains without an administration fourteen months after its establishment.