Five specific questions to opposition MPs about their attitude towards specific reforms in the bill for the modernization of the Superfund the Minister of National Economy and Finance addressed today Kostis Hatzidakis talking to the
Change page
“The bill marks a turning point for the Superfund, its contribution to the development effort, better service to citizens in their daily lives and Greece’s relations with creditors,” the Minister stressed. Presenting the basic regulations it includes, he raised the following questions:
1.For the absorption of TAIPED and the Financial Stability Fund into the Superfund. “TAIPED has completed most of its mission. I assume you want it to continue operating separately. And the FHEF, according to SYRIZA law, would close in 2025. Do you disagree that you want it to operate for another year?” he said, addressing the official opposition.
two.Limit the powers of the Superfund Supervisory Board and abolish the veto of creditors and the State in the appointment of its members. “What do you want? Should creditors have a veto? Or instead of the Secretary General of the Ministry, the Deputy Governor of the Bank of Greece and a representative of ODDIX, who the bill foresees to participate on the State side, would you prefer the Minister to appoint some of his friends?”
3.For the regulation according to which 50% of TAIPED’s revenues from the use of ports will go to the modernization of other ports, while under the current framework 100% of the revenues are available for servicing the public debt. “We negotiated and managed to get 50% to be allocated to the use of ports. Are you also against this? It is clear that we have not succeeded in negotiating to change the course of history, as some others “managed” with a law and an article”, emphasized Mr.
4.On the National Investment Fund: “It is a fund created according to the model of many other EU countries, it will cover strategic sectors, it will not compete with other funds or large investment initiatives. And it changes the image of the Superfund because it shows that it will not be just a creditors’ fund, but a fund that will contribute much more intensely to the development process. I hope that all parties will support the initiative. Why say no to state support for the development process?” said the minister.
5.Regarding the measures to modernize the Superfund subsidiaries according to the PPC model, with greater flexibility in hiring, attracting executives from the private sector, streamlining purchasing, and removing trade unionists from disciplinary boards, Mr. Hatzidakis emphasized: “Let us decide what is the greater good: the ‘holy’ State or the interests of the defenseless citizen? For us, citizens clearly come first.
We need drivers and spare parts on buses on time to avoid delays. And we are removing trade unionists from disciplinary boards – I understand that some of you won’t like this – because the role of a trade unionist is not to judge, but to defend workers’ rights.
As for private sector executives, I repeat that between the criticism of the “golden boys” and the criticism that I have destroyed companies and with them the national economy, I prefer the criticism of the “golden boys”. We have to listen to the complaints of ordinary citizens and find solutions beyond bureaucratic frameworks.”
Responding to interventions by opposition MPs, Mr Hatzidakis also noted:
-For PPC: “If it’s such a bad company, why are 50% of consumers your customers? If you know their interests better, tell them to look for your competitors. I don’t want to make any other kind of association of interests.”
-For EYDAP and EYATH: “They entered the Superfund with its founding law 4389/2916 on SYRIZA, as a real guarantee for the debt. For this reason, the creditors requested compensation now that the two companies are being nationalized. We managed to have 50% of the value of the companies allocated to debt reduction and the other 50% will be the initial capital of the National Investment Fund.”
“I am waiting,” concluded Mr. Hatzidakis, “for the opposition’s positions on specific articles. It will be seen in the vote what their attitude is. On the one hand, there is a sterile refusal to change anything, to adhere to the 2016 SYRIZA law. And on the other, an intervention with a strong reformist color that changes Greece’s relationship with its creditors and marks the transition of the Superfund to a new era. I do not want to believe that the ideologies of a few will prevail. It is not worth it in Greece in 2024.”