Prime Minister Costas Simitis’s hints to the Cabinet yesterday, when he called on government officials to take advantage of the positive image created by the dismantling of November 17 as a starting point for initiatives in all sectors of government work, raise a question which does not solely concern PASOK but also New Democracy. The issue for the ruling party is whether the success of the investigation into terrorism can be a springboard for recovery. For the opposition, the question is the other way round: If solving terrorist crimes can be a springboard for PASOK, should ND not react with a similar awakening?

Though one cannot definitely predict a recovery for PASOK, recent developments confirm that the reverse prediction cannot be made with any certainty either. Events have the habit of surprising us and of upsetting balances we tend to think of as stable. If dismantling November 17 is not enough on its own to enhance the government’s image, who knows what will happen when that is combined with the accession of Cyprus to the European Union, which will very likely be signed in Athens, a series of tax concessions and even an improvement in the international economy?

Such a combination could convince the public once again that the government has found the way to do substantive work and encourage a significant proportion of voters that this work must not be disrupted by a change in government.

It is pure speculation, though not at all unlikely, that this possibility of a government recovery might show the opposition that the theory of the ripe fruit is too shaky to rely on in politics. Suddenly, the accumulation of political factors that could favor PASOK negates the certainty that New Democracy simply had to wait for victory. Against these factors, which the government will project as proof of seriousness, the opposition must put up examples of even greater consistency and preparedness. It must offer substantive political discourse, with meaningful views on the vital issues affecting the country, clear announcements of the measures it plans to take and a convincing explanation of why these measures are advisable. Only in this way, with a substantial political dialogue, can it outdo any achievements by the government. And only in this way can it correspond to the institutional role of the opposition, which is the critical presentation of solid solutions. Silence is not always golden.