Entangled interests, corruption

You often mention a post-election consensus. How compatible is that commitment with your frequent attacks recently against ND? I promise to achieve a maximum post-electoral consensus. What you interpret as an attack is, in effect, a clear description of the danger inherent in not realizing the differences between the parties and the effect a change of government would have without any guarantees of stability or an understanding of the needs of the new age. I would not participate in any consensus if I wanted change to come about by concealing differences. I am not doing it within the democratic camp, so there is no reason to try and do so outside. Bridges of communication are there and they are open. The people know that. They expect me to always be open to discussion with the other political parties and to be open to consensual procedures. You admit that there is a problem in Greece with corruption. However, you have seldom referred to the phenomenon of entangled interests between the government and major economic interests. Does the phenomenon exist and if so, how do you intend to deal with it? Corruption is one thing, entangled interests another. Corruption exists at all levels of public life, in some areas it is widespread, in others it is less so. I will deal with it by restricting bureaucracy and by increasing the objective criteria in the examination of citizens’ affairs by civil servants who are supposed to be serving them. The neologism «entangled interests» describes procedures that are often within the letter of the law, but which create distortions in politics, complicate people’s access to information, and raise obstacles to the development of new business activity. Politicians have to warmly embrace the «transparency onslaught» which I have proposed and which I intend to implement in all areas of my government. The question is not to freeze the market. The question is to force it to function under transparent conditions of competition.