HELLENIC REPUBLIC
MINISTRY OF INTERIOR
PRESS OFFICE
Athens, 1/4/ 2012
The Minister of Interior, Tassos Giannitsis’ interview in the newspaper
“To Vima” with the journalist N. Chasapopoulos
1. In your opinion can the public sector act as the private sector
does? In what way? Do you have any experience in both sectors?
Unfortunately under these circumstances this is not feasible. Not that the
private sector works without serious problems. If it had done, we would
not have been faced with the current situation. Inefficiency, lack of
meritocracy, offhandedness, failure and corruption are present in the
private sector, as well. However, we often have the sanction of the
markets and, in general, a more satisfactory degree of efficiency.
Nevertheless, I believe that no country has moved forward with success,
without a strong and effective public sector. In Greece, we want
development, social welfare, justice, we want everything and at the same
time we have a public sector openly disdained by us. This disdain has
resulted in a generalised crisis- essentially, in the collapse- we are
experiencing.
2. Can a change of the electoral law restore and renew the political
system? Can it prevent the interlacing between political and
economic factors?
Interweaving can be observed in any country regardless of the electoral
system. Certainly, an institutional change could rationalise the political
system. For the members of parliament and ministers, it could cause a
rupture in the model of their dependence on pressures not related to public
interest, but on the personal interests of certain social classes. In a
democracy, this is not a problem in itself. However, it becomes a great
problem, when the electoral frame allows that such interests are added up,
undermine the collective interest and act against the great objectives and
key values of politics and political ethics.
1
3. According to media publications you would be the Minister of
Finance, replacing Mr. Venizelos. We have seen reports according t o
which some people were afraid of you, they were more afraid of a
yeast establishing a “Papademos party”. How close to reality were all
these?
I do not care about all this backstage chatter. To be clear, before the
decisions were made I had a contact with the Prime Minister. My position
was that I had no problem about three solutions: to be replaced before
elections, to remain in the Ministry of Interior until the elections, to be
moved to the Ministry of Finance, if he considered it necessary, although
this solution had many risks for me and for the future. I am glad he did not
opt for the last solution.
As far as the fears for a Papademos party are concerned, the best way to
overcome the fears is to speak with real sincerity and address efficiently
the problems created by the crisis. “Efficiently” means with courage,
pragmatism, a mood of transcendence and looking to the future, what I
could refer as “the big” future not “the small” future. In other words, what
the prime minister has been doing during all these months.
4. What do you think about the positions developed by the Troika in
the European Parliament? Can we continue with a severe internal
devaluation?
Internal devaluation has its limits and requires a delicate balance. It is
difficult to distinguish when the policy followed is self annulling because it
exceeds the limits and when it is nullified because it can not work
effectively. We neither took seriously the crisis, nor implemented our
commitments, nor developed our own alternative visionary strategy.
5. What should be the first priorities of the new government after
elections?
To build the confidence of the international community in Greek politics,
the confidence of the Greek society in the government policy, the
confidence of unemployed people in relation to measures to tackle
unemployment, and the confidence of investors in the political and
economic prospects. It is the main precondition of success for all policies.
Also to seek a change in balance in relation to the growth , not in the
sense of a credit or fiscal laxity which is not feasible, but though
modernising the state, making use of resources for investment purposes,
eliminating intransparency, improving productivity, attracting international
investments and implementing other changes which will create a
cumulative favourable development climate.
2
6. Can the country expect better prospects from the Memorandum 2
and in what way? Can it expect a change in the correlation of political
forces in Europe and a revision of the policy followed by MerkelSarkozy?
I think that the onus is on our own ability to act. Let us not wait for
solutions to come from international correlations which will not change
many things. Our future can not always rely on foreign forces.
7. How ready is the state machinery for elections? How much will the
elections cost? Can the state afford the cost of by-elections if a
single party government does not get elected?
Considering that each election costs 60-70 million € and that in order to
have 320 million € we reduced pensions and other costs, people can make
their own choices. Of course, democracy is not measured in this way but
we can not remain indifferent to its costs, either.
8. What do you think about the rise in polls of the extreme right wing
parties?
It is a sign of political and ideological weakness
9. Is there still room for a new political party and under what
conditions?
There is always room for new ideas, new political proposals and new
people. What really matters is whether in the phase of the crisis a new
perception of the modern world, convincing answers to crucial questions
and wider future prospects can be highlighted. It is indifferent to the
society if they will be expressed by the existing parties or by new ones.
What is important is not the colour of the cat but whether it catches mice.
10. Do you feel vindicated in relation to the developments evolved
about the insurance system after 2001?
It is not a matter of vindication. What is important is its impact on the
current situation. When we send crucial problems on the podium, we pay
too high a price which is massive, unjust and multiple. Let us have a look
at the current problems, the health system, the unemployment,
environmental issues, development issues, the state reform, corruption
and let us think about the lessons learned from the developments in
relation to the insurance system.
3
11. Theodoros Pangalos was among the people who disagreed with
you and requested your dismissal from the government. Today what
would you say to him?
In a humorous mood, I would thank him wholeheartedly. If the insurance
reform had been passed then, people would have thought of me as a
heartless man, a technocrat without any social sensitivity, a man who does
not understand politics, who destroyed the pension system and
deconstructed a strategic social pillar.
Fortunately for me but
unfortunately for the country the reform did not pass. However, I had then
accepted in practice to bear the burden of the insurance reform, in order to
prevent the reality we are experiencing today.
.
4