Speech of Andros Kyprianou, General Secretary of the C.C. of AKEL, in the discussion on the 2016 State Budget
House of Representatives, 16th December 2016, Nicosia
In our political speeches we are used to talking about “critical” periods. In Cyprus, many people usually label a pre-election campaign a “critical” period. For AKEL, we consider as “critical” the period during which the future of the country and the Cypriot people’s interests is decided. We also consider as critical the period during which Cyprus, the wider region and the whole world face complex and multifaceted problems.
Developments in our region
The rivalries in the wider Eastern Mediterranean area are increasing as the geostrategic designs of the US and their allies are reaching a climax. At the same time, an enormous military and humanitarian crisis is developing in Syria, whilst the battle with the Islamic state organization (ISIS) is reaching a climax.
The inhumane and deadly terrorist acts committed by the ISIS which are denounced by everyone, did not appear out of nowhere. They were not spontaneously organized by some “psychopaths” as various circles and forces like to say. How did the jihadists emerge and grow? Where do they find money and weapons? How are they supported? These are the main questions raised. The basic answers to these questions have already been given. The Iraqi Intelligence Service reported that the jihadist’s revenues from the oilfields under their control amount to 5 million US dollars daily. But, who is buying this oil from the jihadists? The answer is simple and obvious: those who can afford it and those who are profiteering. One of these countries is Turkey.
Allow me to also remind everyone of the public admission made by Hillary Clinton herself who said “We have funded them.” Let us not also forget the European Union’s decision, in April 2013, for an end to the embargo on the import of Syrian oil to Europe. This is how they strengthened economically the groups of the north-eastern part of Syria, because of the oil fields they had under their control – among them jihadists as well. Let us not also forget the important reminder made by the Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development of Germany, namely that “we must pose the question, who is arming and financing them? The keyword here is Qatar.” Let us not also forget the admission by the French President that France had supplied arms and weapons to the so-called Syrian opposition. In addition, we shouldn’t forget the Reuter report that the US Congress in 2014 voted and approved funding and equipment for the “Free Syrian Army” and the jihadists.
To all of these, we must add the West’s hypocrisy in the case of the confrontation between Turkey and Russia. The West didn’t just tolerate the Turkish provocation, but supported it.
The Anastasiades government’s inexplicable and boastful statement, as it was delivered by the Foreign Minister that “we will terrorise the terrorists” and its willingness for Cyprus to assist the attacks against Syria concerns us. Unfortunately this shows that the Government does not analyse, and therefore does not realize the dangers that are lie in wait for our country and people as a result of our involvement in the on-going military operations.
We reiterate that the first thing that should be done is to put an end to any kind of strengthening of the “Islamic State” by the member-states of NATO and the G20. It is imperative that the attacks on those who are fighting ISIS on the ground, that is to say the army of the Syrian Arab Republic and the Kurdish forces in the country, must stop. We also stress that terrorism is not combated by curbing human rights and drawing up terror laws.
Unfortunately it is not only on these matters that the Anastasiades-DISY party Government chooses to indulge in communication games without analysing and assessing the impact of the developments underway. The same “carefree” attitude is also taken on a number of other issues related to EU policies. As AKEL, we have long ago tabled the request for a debate on the issue of the banking union and the new trade and investment relationship between the European Union and the US. It seems however that no one is moved.
Banking union and TTIP
With the much-publicised banking union, the European Union took control of banking institutions, claiming that this will improve its capabilities of forecasting, as well as preventing and resolving future crises. In fact, the banking union creates the conditions for the further consolidation and merger of banks to the benefit of the big banking corporations. For the Cooperative movement, these developments will be disastrous if political decisions are not promptly taken. We stress this point. Let the government and ruling forces assume their responsibilities.
As regards the new trade and investment partnership between the EU and the US, this seeks to severely compress labour rights, ease regulations in the areas of environment and food safety, as well as to promote the liberalization of the services market such as health, education and water. Together, these policies aim to provide more incentives for the maximisation of major multinational company’s profitability on both sides of the Atlantic, ignoring the dangers for workers and SME’s. What measures does the Government intend to take against such policies to protect the already affected economy of Cyprus? No one knows. All we know is that the Anastasiades-DISY party Government is being established as the Government of the “privileged and select few”. Maybe we will once again be accused – because of our assessments – of being “Eurosceptics”. This is what they were also telling us about our position on the European Union and the Eurozone. Life itself has shown who made the correct assessments and who constantly cultivated illusions among the people.
The negotiations on the Cyprus problem
Within this framework negotiations are underway to resolve the Cyprus problem. This is a positive development, if one considers that until April 2015, the Cyprus problem was not only at a stage of stagnation, but regression as well.
The road towards the solution of the Cyprus problem is not strewn with flowers. The truth is that we still don’t have concrete examples of the dampening of Turkish intransigence. Besides, the core issues of the guarantees, security and the settlers, on which Turkey itself will be judged, have not yet been discussed substantively. Moreover, some of the positions of the Turkish Cypriot side, at least as these are proclaimed in public, come into conflict with the principles of the solution. If we add to these Mr. Anastasiades’ reservation on the Christofias-Talat convergences that had been demonized for petty-party expediencies and considerations, it is becomes clear that we still have a long way to go.
The insistence of circles and forces in the Greek Cypriot side on rejecting the agreed framework of the solution is also causing difficulties. To the extent that the different approaches concern issues related to tactics and the handling of the Cyprus problem, we believe that it is possible to find an understanding and overcome disagreements. But if the differences concern the strategic goal of a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation with political equality, as set out in the texts of the United Nations, then this is where each and every one must tell things by their real name. For AKEL, such approaches are merely pompous slogans ∙ empty and meaningless rhetoric. As AKEL, we insist that any going back on all that has been agreed for decades will only lead to the permanent partition of Cyprus. Abandoning the goal of a bi-communal, bi-zonal federal solution will never be accepted neither by the Turkish Cypriot community, nor by Turkey, nor however by the international community as well. What would consequently follow can be predicted with mathematical precision: that is to say, the upgrading of the pseudo-state and subsequently recognition ∙ that is to say, permanent partition.
We all agree that the Cyprus problem is primarily a problem of invasion, occupation and illegal colonization. However, the fact that the Cyprus problem also has its internal aspects cannot be ignored or downgraded; aspects that demand the normalization of relations between the two communities through the achievement of a federal solution. On our part, adhering to principles is required. However it also requires flexibility on tactics and on the handling of the Cyprus problem, otherwise the principles and the agreed framework of the solution of the Cyprus problem will remain declarations without effect.
Unfortunately we didn’t all manage to handle the Cyprus problem far from petty-party expediencies and considerations. These petty-party expediencies are today driving certain circles and forces to talk about some supposed collusion between AKEL and DISY propagated by those who with their own votes or stand elected Nikos Anastasiades to the Presidency; by those who agree with Anastasiades on the issues related to the economy. AKEL is accused of collusion with DISY party, at the same as our Party has not changed a single bit of the positions it has always adhered to; positions it also projected during the period of the Demetris Christofias government. AKEL is upholding today too, the same positions we are supporting today, despite the attack we came under. We withstood those attacks back then and stood our ground, assuming all the political cost. We will not deviate from them now, especially since our positions have been vindicated by developments themselves, just not to be accused of being in collusion with DISY.
AKEL and our positions are not prey to the petty-party considerations of anyone. We are working with all our strength to bring the day when a reunited federal Cyprus will be a beacon and an example for the whole world; a modern example of the harmonious coexistence of two communities of different ethnicity, language and religion who will be co-managing their common state; a country that will have managed to throw out the armies and channel all its power and resources to social investments and economic growth. We will not, neither did we in the past nor will we now, sacrifice this hope for the sake of election rhetoric. On the contrary, we have been building this hope for years, little by little, step by step with progressive Turkish Cypriots based on the solid foundations of rapprochement, reconciliation and mutual understanding so that we can bequeath it to future generations.
From the very beginning we had stated that if the President of the Republic follows the policy that we consider as correct, we will support the negotiating procedure. We clarified that we consider as correct policy the policy that doesn’t begin the negotiation procedure from scratch, but that the President should continue from where we had left off, namely with the Christofias-Talat convergences. Unfortunately, the President did not listen to us. The result was that months of stagnation and regressions went by, but we also paid a corresponding cost at the talks.
With the assumption by Mr. Akinci of the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community, but also as a result of the utilisation of these convergences, progress began to be recorded at the negotiating table. However, there are still the problems I have mentioned. Currently the property issue is dominating the talks. It is an extremely difficult chapter which has to do with the properties of tens of thousands of our compatriots. The problem is complicated further because forty-one years have already elapsed since its creation. Apart from the objective difficulties, the Turkish Cypriot side’s stand isn’t helpful either as well; a stand that stubbornly refuses to simultaneously discuss the territorial issue. These are two inseparable chapters whose parallel negotiation would be particularly helpful. In the midst of the procedure the notorious “Demopoulos decision” of the European Court of Human Rights was also announced, which undermined our key negotiating positions on the property issue.
When Eroglu took over the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community, he torpedoed the most basic convergences that were achieved by Christofias-Talat and on the property issue too, demanding a complete exchange of property. Mr. Akinci returned to these convergences and in this sense we have registered some progress. However, there are still problems. With the positions expressed in public by the Turkish Cypriot leadership further progress cannot be achieved. Moreover, the insistence on guaranteed majorities also conflicts with the Christofias-Talat convergences that there will be no restrictions on the establishment and acquisition of property (right of abode) but merely a regulation regarding the exercise of political rights.
The talks are now at a crossroads. If substantial progress on the property is achieved then a discussion on the territorial issue will follow, this time with maps and figures. If this chapter is also agreed, then we will arrive at the last phase, namely the chapter concerning the issue of security and guarantees. We reiterate that a member state of the EU does not need other guarantees. What is more, Cyprus doesn’t need any NATO guarantees. We express our satisfaction that this came to be understood and the idea was abandoned. What’s more, we all have to remain true and consistent to the principle of demilitarization.
If we get to this stage Turkey will be called upon to show that its verbal declarations expressing support for the procedure are of practical relevance. But if no progress is made on the property issue, then the negotiating procedure itself will be in danger of collapsing, with all the resulting negative consequences that would entail.
AKEL does not like talking about last chances. New opportunities will always exist. However this time there is a particular coincidence ∙ in the Turkish Cypriot community there is a leadership that is seeking a solution, as it itself of course perceives the solution. Turkey’s well-intentioned interests also render a solution imperative for a number of important reasons (the situation in the region and within Turkey itself, EU accession and others). Furthermore, Turkey also knows very well that the only peaceful way for the Turkish Cypriots to benefit and for Turkey itself to engage in the discussions on the natural gas is through the solution of the Cyprus problem. Of course we must also realize that the best guarantee for the utilisation of our natural wealth is the comprehensive solution of our political problem.
The assumption by Mustafa Akinci of the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community sent out a clear message that our Turkish Cypriots compatriots want a solution of the Cyprus problem. We do not share the theory propagated that it does not make a difference who is the Turkish Cypriot leader since it is Turkey that takes the decisions. The significant convergences achieved between Christofias – Talat are clear proof of our assessment – these convergences were torpedoed by Eroglu and returned when Akinci assumed the leadership of the Turkish Cypriot community. The coincidence, therefore, exists and it the task of the responsible political leadership to realize it and to do all it can to make use of it.
There is something else but which many often seem to forget. After 50 years of separation and roughly 40 years of separate living, the Turkish Cypriot community is now facing new dynamics, even more intensive and dangerous. Life and developments have showed that the occupied territories are being incorporated daily into Turkey, at all levels. The Turkish Cypriot community currently faces the real danger of political and cultural extinction.
The resistance and broader social opposition of Turkish Cypriots to Ankara’s various impositions are also growing. However, no one can guarantee their effectiveness given the correlations between a small community and Turkey. On the other hand, due to the political and economic deadlocks, it seems a peculiar Turkish Cypriot nationalism is developing inside the Turkish Cypriot community which sets distances both from Turkey and from the Greek Cypriot community.
As long as the Cyprus problem is not resolved, these voices will multiply and because of their reactionary character they will deepen the problem rather than resolving it. Consequently, statements like “We are doomed to coexist with them(Greek Cypriots)” as President Anastasiades – we hope by mistake – said, but also the outbursts of nationalism and the neo-fascism being cultivated deliberately or unconsciously, are pushing the Turkish Cypriot community even further into the arms of Turkey. The progressives Turkish Cypriots were and will remain our natural allies in the struggle to reunify our homeland. If the Right and the extreme-right in Cyprus fail once again to understand the anguish and aspirations of the progressive forces of the Turkish Cypriots they will have caused irreparable damage, this time, to the whole of Cyprus.
AKEL assumes the burden of its own share responsibility for the solution of the Cyprus problem. We are trying to help as much as we can so that this time we can reach the desired goal, which is a solution based on principles and on the agreed framework. This is our vision: to deliver a solution that will liberate and reunite the common homeland of Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots; a just, functional and viable under the circumstances solution; a solution that will ensure a lasting peace, security and prosperity; a solution that will protect our common future with our Turkish Cypriot compatriots. To arrive at such a solution we will tirelessly continue our activities for rapprochement and reconciliation.
Many circles and people talk about the cost of the solution, but they forget the huge economic benefits that we will have in the medium and long term. Just the savings from demilitarization and economic benefits of lifting the embargo on Turkish ports and airports alone are enough to show that the solution of the Cyprus problem will bring growth and prosperity.
On the issues of the economy
Regarding the issues of the economy, we have had enough every night watching and listening to the news celebrating about a Cypriot “success story” and all the talk about the imminent exit from the Memorandum. The Government and DISY party insist on saying only half of the truth. March 2016 was the milestone which from the beginning was set for the conclusion of the payment of instalments by the European Support Mechanism and the International Monetary Fund. This does not however mean the end of the supervision over the economic policies Cyprus implements. This will continue until 75% of the money will be paid in line also with the European treaties. The Director General of the European Support Mechanism, Klaus Regklingk recently said: “We will be in close contact with the government for a long time…The Treaty of the European Support Mechanism requires us to do that, to be in contact, given the money that we have disbursed to Cyprus. […] We will monitor developments in the country, because we must be sure that we will take back in time the amounts we give. The first repayment of capital is set for 2025 and the final payment is due in 2031”. But, President Anastasiades, DISY party leader Neophytou and Finance Minister Georgiades are pretending they haven’t heard these statements.
The exit from the Memorandum does not mean the simultaneous termination of the Memorandum policies of austerity as the Government Ministers are declaring every day. They are insisting on the continuation of the same vicious economic policies implemented over the past three years. The Minister of Finance, projecting himself as the best student in the class, not a few times has said that regardless of these devastating terms that they had imposed on us with the Memorandum, the Anastasiades Government would have implemented them anyway. A clear example of this philosophy is the policy of privatizations. It is now being repeated openly that privatisations are an ideological question, even though Mr. Anastasiades pledged during the presidential election campaign – indeed with his signature in a letter – that he will not promote any privatisations.
On the government’s supposed “success story”
Speaking recently at the “Economist” Conference, the President said that “Cyprus is entering a new era, an era of growth and prosperity” and that “Cyprus is offered as a successful economic reform story.” This is happening only in the minds of the Anastasiades- DISY party government.
In day-to-day life, the situation in the real economy illustrates a different story. Unemployment has risen to over 16%. The number of unemployed has exceed 70,000 and 30,000 others have already emigrated. The danger of poverty, according to European Commission data, threatens 234,000 of our people. In 2012 the Cyprus economy had an annual production of goods and services that amounted to € 16, 2 billion. Now, after three years of the Memorandum’s enforcement, production will hardly exceed € 15 billion. In other words, we have an economy generating € 1 billion less, at the same time as the government and DISY are saying that we are witnessing growth and prosperity. Over the last two years the income of 10% of the most privileged has increased by 3.4% as opposed to the 90% of society which have suffered an 8% reduction in their income. According to recent figures released by “Eurostat”, Cyprus is the most unequal society throughout the whole of the EU. It is by far the country with the most rapidly widening gap between social groups. Cyprus records the biggest decline in wages in all the EU countries. In 2016 the purchasing power of the average salary will go back 20 years.
The income of labour over the last three years has been reduced by € 1, 6 billion, that is to say approximately 20%. At the same time capital gains remain stable in 2015 and for 2016 they are expected to increase by 200 million. The rich are becoming richer and the poor poorer. This is the result of the class policy of the Anastasiades-DISY party Government. This is the “success story” which the Government is pompously advertising. This is what their associates in the EU are congratulating them for. We award them the title of the Government representing a privileged select few which they have deservedly won.
There is no other alternative, they tell us. We must support those who will kick-start the economy, as the Minister of Interior stated. I’ll answer by giving just one example: Iceland. A country that has not only already punished those responsible for the banking crisis, but, more importantly, called on those who could afford to pay for the consequences of the crisis to do so, while protecting the vulnerable groups of the population. It introduced a wealth tax and increased the taxation on profits. It cut high salaries, extended the unemployment benefit, social welfare and the provision of housing. This is how they exited the crisis in record time.
Unfortunately the Government and DISY party are not aware of their responsibility for the policies they have chosen to impose on the people. Neither do they comprehend the social cost these policies have had. They are celebrating Cyprus’ entry to the markets and about the low interest rates they have supposedly secured. It does not bother them that in Cyprus we pay the highest lending rates in the Eurozone. They consistently invoke banking sector achievements and its supposed stabilization. They ignore the fact that the banks do not give any new loans; that the banks call for new recapitalisations. They advertise day and night the results registered on public finances and the creation of primary surpluses. They don’t care from whose pockets they are getting the money from. Beneficial for the privileged few, loved by the Troika and indifferent to the people – this is what they have shown that they want and can be as a Government.
The President of the Democratic Rally party DISY says that AKEL is exercising destructive criticism, that AKEL is projecting policies and rhetoric taken from the past, that AKEL is living in another world. Levelling and destructive was in fact the stand they themselves took during the previous five years. We will not follow their example because AKEL is a patriotic, responsible and serious Party. Let them therefore tell us: Is AKEL’s criticism destructive when it refers to the unprecedented levels of unemployment and poverty? Is AKEL in some another world when it refers to the mass emigration of our young people because they have no prospects in Cyprus? Is our criticism based on promoting the logic of instability when we express the need to protect our fellow citizens from the foreclosure of their homes? Have they forgotten that these were commitments made by the President? Have they forgotten that they promised the immediate promotion of legislation on rents? Is AKEL’s effort to stop the selling off of public wealth and property based on the logic of chaos? And why isn’t the selling off of the public wealth of a semi-occupied country considered as chaos? Or the addition of even more unemployed to the already long lists of the unemployed?
Are the thousands of voices of despair still waiting to see some ray of hope from the fiasco of the so-called Guaranteed Minimum Income destructive criticism too? The Government is boasting that it has given to sixteen thousands, young families, income. However it doesn’t say that it took the money from poor pensioners, single parents and the disabled to give them. It is boasting that it has made a great social reform. In fact it took from the poor to give to the poorest leaving the rich untouched. Indeed they are doing them the great favour by giving them a small amount of 100 euros “to get by” until their application is examined.
The health system is simply collapsing. They are dismantling it in their attempt to serve private interests. Public health spending cover 43% of the total, representing one of the lowest percentage rates in the EU. Just 6.9% of government spending goes to health, a very low percentage compared to the EU average of around 15.8%. Finally, the percentage of the health expenditures covered by the contribution of patients themselves amounts to 49.4%, whilst the EU average ranges to the much lower rate of 14%.
It is more than obvious that the governmental and DISY officials have remained confined to their offices or the banquet halls with their privileged select friends and “customers”. They can’t see and feel the reality experienced by workers, farmers, SME’s, the unemployed, pensioners, single parents, the disabled ∙ all those who expect support to survive.
On the government’s proclamations about consultation
Unfortunately not only are they demeaning and humiliating every effort for assertion and struggle, as well as every attempt to challenge the policies they have implemented jointly with the Troika, but they are also knowingly dismissing any possibility of an understanding. How can the political forces believe what the President means what he says when he talks about a collective approach and consultation? When he authorizes the government to act according to the authoritarian dogma “we decide and order”? When the House of Representatives is literally ignored so that the Government passes its positions arrogantly, without any dialogue and consultation? When institutions are being denigrated on a daily basis? When persons are being appointed to senior institutions of the state because they stood on the same election platform as Mr. Anastasiades and who are humiliating their offices in the worst possible way? When people whom the President trusted as being the “best of the excellent” prove to be inferior and mediocre? When those who were giving us lessons about the need to respect the independence of institutions are – when they themselves are being held to account – today in conflict with those they themselves have appointed.
How can the political forces believe what the President means when instead of the President and the Government trying to cultivate conditions for an understanding, they are taking decisions that sow discord? How do they expect that there will be the necessary for the country unity when they are cunningly trying to force decisions through scheming/machinations and through blackmailing front page headlines? Let me again repeat that such games do not affect AKEL, since we would never accept to rewrite and distort the history of this country because this is what the petty fanaticism of some circles dictates.
On the natural gas issue
Even the hope that existed for an exit from the deadlocks through the utilisation of the natural gas seems to be vanishing. During the pre-election campaign Mr. Anastasiades was talking about a national strategy for the utilisation of natural gas, with a timetable that would be strictly implemented. Two years on, the Cyprus Hydrocarbon State Company (KRETYK) was dissolved. The creation of a Terminal station at the Vassiliko port was abandoned for a long time. Cyprus ceased to be considered as the ideal regional centre for liquefying and exporting natural gas to the international markets. Moreover, for three years now the Government has been consulting with the Troika on energy issues behind closed doors. A comprehensive plan and a strategy are absent, resulting in the destruction of the prospects for Cyprus. The agreement with British Gas is a positive development. However, we must warn the government that the transfer of the Cyprus Natural Gas to the terminals of Egypt from the Aphrodite gas field reserves should not be seen as an opportunity to permanently cancel the prospect of the creation of our own liquefaction terminal.
I hope the reply to all of these positions will not be the usual by now response that “AKEL is not entitled to speak.” They were projecting this catchphrase when they were in opposition and wanted AKEL not to speak out so that not a word could be heard about the criminal mistakes that led to the collapse of the Cyprus economy. Permit me to just recall the monumental statement made by DISY President Mr. Neophytou in 2012 when he said that “when Orphanides speaks (Note: former Governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus) the Americans, Europeans and the Japanese follow his words and are hanging on to hear what he will say so that the international media dealing with the economy records it, while Mr. Christofias and his government who know everything, don’t even want to listen to him”, or the statement that “In Cyprus we have the best bankers, but Christofias doesn’t even invite them for a coffee”. I recall that back then as AKEL we had tabled a request in Parliament demanding to be informed about the real situation of the banks. This was never discussed in the Parliamentary Finance Committee. Mr. Orphanides, who took with him the hard discs and left his post, and all those whether politicians, economists or newspaper columnists, had arrived at the “scientific” conclusion that it was Christofias’ social policies and “cheques” that were to blame for everything. AKEL, according to them, should not have spoken because it was also to blame for the haircut on bank deposits – the very haircut which Mr. Anastasiades knew about in advance about, the same haircut which he pledged in a stern voice and with infinite passion not to accept. The very same haircut on bank deposits he had accepted, signed and subsequently the operation was coordinated so that AKEL would be blamed for this as well. This propaganda is not convincing anymore.
Just a few days ago the Minister of Finance said that the biggest danger to the economy is the anti-reformist and populist DNA that those reacting to the government’s policies carry with them. The Anastasiades Government talks about populism when during the pre and post-election period it overwhelmed the people with “pledges” and commitments which it subsequently forgot with the greatest of ease.
They named the sell-out of the Semi-governmental organizations as “reforms” and want us to yield. They called the wages of 500 euros and the impoverishment of the people “reforms” and want people to applaud them. The Minister is already warning us that if we don’t do so we will find him confronting us. This is for sure. We are on opposite sides. We will always oppose their anti-social policies.
Whether they like it or not, AKEL will continue to speak out. It will continue to defend working people and their rights. It will continue trying to protect them from the onslaught, as well as those in need. We are struggling to protect the primary family home and the small commercial enterprise. Unfortunately we have encountered the Government’s refusal, which has referred those provisions that were to the benefit of society. We are fighting to preserve public property and assets, in contrast to the government which during the election, but also after the election campaign, made privatizations its official policy. We have tabled concrete proposals to improve the chaos created by the “reform” of social policy and the implementation of the Guaranteed Minimum Income. We have submitted a concrete proposal for alleviating small owners from taxation of immovable property which was also rejected, indeed at the same time as the Minister of Finance insists on arguing that this government did not impose any new taxes. He forgets that it is this government that has imposed the tax hike on small owners.
AKEL’s reply
We want to give the country a new dynamic, a new perspective. We want to improve the country’s productive capacity. We want to support the real economy, based on a different model of economic activity; to rely on policies that can deliver, such as the radical reform of the tax system for a fairer distribution of the tax burden, for a fairer redistribution of resources, the adoption of incentives for growth and the stamping out of tax evasion; to promote savings in public finances rationally rather than destructively and to channel them towards growth and development and strengthen the welfare state; to preserve and protect the social character of public utility organizations; to modernize them so that they will be a driving force for growth and development and for the boosting of the state’s finances. We need to put once again small family businesses at the centre of economic policy and give them access to funding; to elaborate a modern strategy to support and develop industrial production; to promote a genuine agrarian reform for development with radical new methods of production and trade; to modernize our tourism policy; to re-orientate our social policy to fight poverty and social exclusion; to establish a Uniform National Housing Policy; to protect labour codes and combat unemployment through new, quality and dignified jobs; to promote measures to alleviate the households and SME’s immersed in big debts. As AKEL, we have already submitted numerous proposals on all these issues and we are simultaneously drawing up and elaborating new proposals.
Cyprus cannot remain stuck in stagnation. The people cannot endure any longer the burdens without any hope. We have a duty not to deliver the future of this country and its people to the “reforms” that are selling off all what we have gained. We have a duty to stop this decline; to oppose and resist all those who think that this country belongs to them ∙ those who think they are doing people a favour if they guarantee a salary of 500 euro or the 400 euro benefit.
The dilemma is not which party will be victorious in an election battle. The dilemma is who will be so strong the day after so as to stand up and struggle when the future of the country will be decided, when the foreclosures of primary family homes will start, when they will take education, health and all that we have built through so many struggles out of our hands.
As far as AKEL is concerned, we assure the Cypriot people that we will fight to give back to our country hope, perspective and dignity.
