Surrealism and hypocrisy on immigration
There was surrealism and a dose of hypocrisy in the debate that preceded the approval of an amendment for the legalization of a number of irregular immigrants who live and work in Greece and who will be granted a permit to work in sectors that are experiencing a lack of hands.
The country’s conservative government brought a bill to Parliament that was better received by the so-called progressive political parties than part of the conservatives.
In the ruling party it is a given that two tendencies coexist: the liberal centrist and the conservative right. The latter reacted negatively to the bill, which is reasonable and expected. The reactionary “torch” was lit by former prime minister Antonis Samaras, who, apparently, expresses a section of the ruling party. All this was both known and to a large extent expected.
What did the parties of the wider center-left do? Did they support the effort or criticize it? They did both!
At the moment when, on this specific issue (which is extremely important, especially for Greece) the center-right government implements an admittedly more centrist and less right-wing policy, the center-left votes for the amendment, therefore considers it “progressive,” but at the same time denounces the government because it implements a conservative or as was described “far-right” policy!
They denounce Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis as a hostage of the far-right when, in this case, he is completely clashing with it, promoting and imposing his own approach, with which the opposition agrees!
In addition to the surrealism, there is also hypocrisy. The opposition criticizes New Democracy because it exempted Samaras from the imposed party discipline on the vote.
This writer is opposed to imposed party discipline. It insults lawmakers, who are not mindless foot soldiers but elected representatives of the people – but that is another discussion for another time.
In practice, all parties impose party discipline when in power, whether they openly state it or take it for granted, and when it is violated, rebel MPs often face censure, usually expulsion – and New Democracy is no exception.
The government spokesman repeated the self-evident thing – that it is not possible to impose party discipline on a former prime minister. A man who held the fate of the country in his hands has at least secured the right to his opinion – and there were reactions by the opposition even to this self-evident truth.
If the positions were reversed, would the leader of the main opposition, Stefanos Kasselakis, expel former premier Alexis Tsipras from SYRIZA, or would PASOK leader Nikos Androulakis expel George Papandreou if he disagreed in a vote?
Too much surrealism and hypocrisy.
