“The government managed to blow up any consensus that seemed to be possible,” emphasized the 4th Vice-President of the BtE and Member of Parliament for Artas of SYRIZA – Progressive Alliance, Olga Gerovasili, speaking in the discussion of the bill on postal voting, I referred to Mrs. Kerameos’s amendment to extend postal voting to national elections as well. “Yesterday, the government proved once again the irresponsibility with which it deals with top issues, such as the vote of Greeks abroad. She proved once again that she is tearing up the parliamentary process and the Constitution, simply to serve her small-party purposes,” he noted.

Mrs. Gerovasili called out the government for “unreliability”, recalling that the Mrs. Kerameos, just the day before yesterday in the newspaper Kathimerini, assured that the bill for postal voting will only concern the European elections and referendums, as the institutional framework for national elections is different. At the same time, responding to the government’s arguments, that the bill deals with abstinence, Olga Gerovasili noted that “such methods are what inflate abstinence, such political practices are what lead the political system to disrepute and untrustworthiness”.

Concluding her intervention, the 4th Vice-President of the BtE emphasized that “there is only one way to return to where we started: For the government to accept our amendment, which ensures the right to both vote and be elected to expatriates, with four constituencies abroad, where expatriates will elect their representatives. But to also accept our amendments on the electronic electoral roll, the facilitation of the exercise of the right to vote for our disabled fellow citizens and the immutability of the process. For us these are inviolable terms” and he added that “the government will not find consent to unacceptable and irresponsible games with the parliamentary process and the Constitution from us”.

Here is the full text of the speech:

“Ladies and gentlemen colleagues,

Yesterday, the government proved once again the irresponsibility with which it deals with top issues, such as the vote of Greeks abroad. She proved once again that she is tearing up the parliamentary process and the Constitution, simply to serve her petty party purposes.

The government proved this yesterday with the surprise amendment to extend the postal vote in the national elections. And what did he accomplish? To blow up any consensus that seemed possible. Because what Mrs. Kerameos did yesterday was not simply the filing of an amendment in the discussion of a bill. It was the complete change of the content of the conversation. A discussion that took place in the committees in other terms. The parties were initially placed in other terms. In other terms, it started yesterday in the plenary session.

But Mrs. Kerameos – apparently at the behest of Mr. Mitsotakis – decided to delete all this and reset the counter. That’s what he did. But we are not at all willing to play on these terms and let the government take the responsibility.

And I am impressed, ladies and gentlemen colleagues of New Democracy – I have been listening to you since last night – that you are also asking us for change because we are reacting. And you tell us how self-explanatory this arrangement is. If this regulation is so self-evident, why didn’t the Minister bring it from the beginning?

On the contrary, for so long Mrs. Kerameos assured that the bill concerns exclusively the European elections. Here is what he said to Kathimerini, just the day before yesterday, January 21: The journalist asks: “Is the application of postal voting in the European elections a rehearsal for its establishment in the national ones as well?”. And the Minister replies: “The specific legislative initiative that is being discussed in the Parliament concerns the European elections and referendums. For national elections, the institutional framework is different”. I submit it to the minutes.

Such unreliability!

What does all this have to do with good legislation and above all with respect for the parliamentary process?

Ladies and gentlemen colleagues,

We came to this discussion in a consensual mood. We took a positive position on the principle, but raised critical objections:

1. That, contrary to the Constitution, the postal vote is converted from an exception to a rule. In other words, that you are introducing a generalization of the voting letter, provided for those outside the State, also in the State.

2. We pointed out to you that, as reported by the scientific service of the Parliament, there is an issue with the time of the postal vote. Citizens will vote 25 days before the official election day. In the meantime, things may have turned upside down in Greece and Europe.

3. We emphasized that in the era of the 4th industrial revolution and digital governance and the “digital revolution” of the government, postal voting is also institutionally problematic, since its compatibility with the dictates of the Constitution and the recommendations of international organizations for the immediacy and secrecy of the vote. You even foresee the possibility of authorizing a third party to receive and send the envelope and private companies to transport them.

Mrs. Kerameos, with the amendment she brought yesterday afternoon, managed to divert the debate from the objections and turn it into a major political confrontation.

And he did this knowing what reactions it would cause. And knowing above all that a broad majority of 200 votes is required to implement this arrangement in the next national elections. Mrs. Kerameos saw that more than 230 MPs were positive on the principle and she believed that with nonsense she will grab our unconditional consent. In reality, however, the government has shown that it does not want any consensus. The only thing she cares about is the petty party impression games on the backs of Greeks abroad.

And since the government has been telling us for so many days that it wants to use the postal vote to deal with abstention, I want to add another dimension. And let me say that it is such methods that inflate abstinence. It is such political practices that lead the political system to disrepute and unreliability. Because they create in the citizens the feeling that politics is a game without rules, without principles, where everything is allowed on the altar of small party expediencies. Even if the parliamentary procedure and the Constitution become rags. And instead of having meaningful discussions, with arguments and with a mood of consensus for solutions to existing problems, we end up in barren confrontations with the responsibility of the government.

Ladies and gentlemen colleagues,

There is only one way to get back to where we started. That the government accept our amendment, which ensures the right to both vote and be elected to expatriates, with four constituencies abroad, where expatriates will elect their representatives. But to also accept our amendments on the electronic electoral roll, the facilitation of the exercise of the right to vote for our disabled fellow citizens and the immutability of the process. These are inviolable conditions for us.

Consent to unacceptable and irresponsible games with the parliamentary process and the Constitution will not be found by the government.

Thank you”.