At the beginning of the debate on the government’s programmatic statements, the Prime Minister avoided general ideological references, which have tired public opinion, as they usually meaningless, and moved with communicative terms in order to win people’s hearts. He announced specific and measurable measures and actions, while his overall plan can be derived from the composition of all he has said, together with all he has avoided mentioning.
He was not afraid to put forward the abolition of university asylum as the “flagship” measure at the beginning of his term, which shows his position on issues of law and order, as well as the structural change of governance with the recommendation of the presidency and the digital support. These are either neutral announcements or actions that have a positive reflection on society, such as that regarding the asylum. It is obvious that with the abolition of the asylum, he wants to drag his opponents into a battle that they have already lost.
On the other hand, the prime minister did not talk about the “great reforms” as he had characterized them in the past, which would accordingly trigger reactions firstly from his political opponents and then from part of the public, and would form a conflicting environment at the beginning of his term.
Mitsotakis did not say anything about the de facto largest reform regarding the social insurance, especially the if he is thinking of transforming the system from a redistributive to a capitalist, as he had clearly indicated when he was in the opposition. Besides, the plan that has been processed by the Secretary of State Notis Mitarakis is ready, and only the legislative wording of it remains. Until the eve of the elections, it was in the first ten bills that he was going to implement with the start of his term.
Similarly, he did not refer to the crucial issue of the public sector: whether he will proceed to a reform- beyond the digitization and improvement of the functioning of public service- that touches on the overall size, the number of employees, whether he will restore the ratio “one to five” in the relationship recruitments-departures and whether he will implement the outsourcing of services to the private sector. In connection with this, he also did not refer to other reforms: whether he will continue with the allocation of a section of Public Health and Education to private individuals, by linking the universities to production, or whether he will proceed to a financial support per child for the kindergartens- plans that have been discussed in the neo-liberal staff.
He fears the inter-party reactions on the name problem
The Prime Minister did not touch on the issue of the relations between the State and the Church, in order not to be criticized of regression, even though after his meeting with the Archbishop he stated that the relevant articles 3 and 9 of the Constitution would not be affected during the revision, while the agreement of the previous government with the Church is regarded as non-existent.
The prime minister was also telegraphic regarding foreign policy issues, where he did not even give the general framework of his own foreign policy. Whether he will proceed on the already-known axes or whether, for example, he will increase economic diplomacy or he will use the economy to strengthen the international position of the country.
Obviously, the prime minister wanted to avoid a debate about the Skopje issue, which would put him in a difficult spot, as he is in fact obliged to implement the Prespa Agreement and thus provoke the criticism of the opposition, as was already the case for his oppositional stance in the recent past, but also provoke the reactions from the hard-core right-wing members of his party- which he fears most. Regarding Skopje, he merely said that he will “mitigate the consequences of the Agreement by monitoring its implementation”, a statement which is contradictory, while for the Greek-Turkish issues he merely invited President Erdogan to make together a bold step in the future./ibna