Αρχείο κατηγορίας 2019 MAIN ARTICLES IN ENGLISH

COMPREHENSIVE AREA DEVELOPMENT OF MANI: 25 YEARS OF UNTAPPED POTENTIAL

2019 MAIN ARTICLES IN ENGLISH

A few decades ago, two Greek prime-ministers, out of patriotism and ambitious national targets made two very important decisions for the future of our country. In 1980 Constantine Karamanlis achieved full membership of Greece in the EEC, and in 2000 Costas Simitis achieved membership of our country in the Eurozone. We believe that both these decisions were premature. These two prime-ministers did not realise that what was lacking was the political education of the Greek citizens. Greeks were unable to understand and assimilate the new rules that were governing this large transnational European family. Greek citizens were not mature enough to see beyond the personal gain, falsified figures, corruption and political bargaining. The consequence was that the very generous EU funds, which have been channelled to our country for the past forty years, have not been used for projects for the common good. The economic crisis, which broke out ten years ago, exposed the iceberg that had been created by the long-term incompetency of various political groups to make use of the high EU subsidies by providing common-good development benefits in their region. Mani is a good example of this incompetency and of not having used the EU funds in the best possible way.

In 1994 the EU announced a new initiative called “Leader II”, according to which there would be funding available for private and state investments. The geographic areas that would be receiving  funding should be homogeneous in terms of geography and having a population of under 20.000 people. Mani fell exactly in this category, and it was as if this programme had been designed specifically for our area! The small communities of Mani reacted with enthusiasm towards this new initiative. In no time, as prescribed by the EU, the limited liability agency “Development Enterprise of Mani” was formed, and was given 2,7 billion drachmas, 2/3 of which was meant to support private businesses with subsidies up to 60%, and the rest was meant to support public investments with 100% subsidy. The memorandum and articles of association of this agency were approved by the EU, and the projects were allocated fairly to different areas and municipalities of Mani. So that the selection of the proposed projects was fair and transparent, a 10-member evaluation committee was formed. The selection of the members of this committee was done during a convention of  the three development committees of Mani, with each committee contributing two engineers and one economist. The evaluation committee unanimously chose 32 investment projects from the 100 projects that were submitted, and it was the first to finish the selection procedure. Unfortunately, their choice of projects was not approved by the Greek Ministry of Agriculture and by some of the politicians of our region, who were after personal gain and were negatively influenced by businessmen who were unsuccessful bidders. They tried to cancel the selection, but the European Ministry of Agriculture intervened and went ahead with the funding to the 32 investment projects mentioned above. After all this, 2/3 of the funding was lost, a very important loss, since about half of this funding was for cultural investments. After two or three years, the agency “Development Enterprise of Mani” became inactive and the EU subsidies had all been spent!

In the next fifteen years only a few of the original private investment projects were materialised through the Comprehensive Programmes of Development of Rural Areas (OΠΑΑΧ), which was run by the Greek Ministry of Agriculture. In 2014 more EU funds were allocated to the thirteen regions of our country, and this subsidy resulted in more “Programmes of Comprehensive Area Development”. Unfortunately, the planning, the strategies and the allocation of the funds are no longer controlled by the local and municipal authorities, but by the thirteen areas (περιφέρειες) of our country!

    During the past 25 years there has been a concentration/centralisation trend in the planning and management of the EU development subsidies to areas of special interest, such as Mani.  Unfortunately, we are all guilty for this unfavourable outcome, because when we were given the opportunity to plan and carry out investment projects on our own, we did not take this chance; instead we supported those politicians who were looking after their personal interest. We still have not understood that a comprehensive development of our area, which has so many unspoiled features, can only be successful if it is based on unanimity, on common actions by local groups and on local politicians who have the required knowledge, experience and management skills. This is the only way to use the EU investment subsidies to Mani effectively and make the best use of the special features of our area.

                                                                                                                                                THE EDITORIAL BOARD

PRE-ELECTION PROMISES –  FIREWORKS AND POLITICAL MATURITY

2019 MAIN ARTICLES IN ENGLISH, Εφημερίδα

We are very close to the municipal elections (May 2019), the European parliamentary elections (also May 2019) and the Greek parliamentary elections (October 2019). Greek citizens will be able to evaluate past politician performances and decide on the best candidates. In law-abiding countries, integrity, political ethics and a merit-based approach in the elections have long been established, and the election process is quick and simple.  For those politicians who are presently in power and want to rerun in the next elections, the evaluation criteria should be based mainly on the work they produced during their term.  For the new candidates, the evaluation criteria should include the candidate’s objectivity, transparency and sound judgement , his/her engagement  in society at the local, national or European level, as well as his/her knowledge and skills in the management of complex projects.

Unfortunately, in our country, the evaluation criteria is often obscured by misleading and disorienting false information, such as the exaggeration of the work produced  and the skillful concealment of everything negative or inappropriate that was done during the term of politicians who wish to be reelected.  Even worse, during the pre-election period, the electorate is being inundated by pre-election promises – or “fireworks” –  false information lacking substance and credibility. This is usually done by the politicians in power. We are also inundated by inflated curricula vitae of the new aspiring candidates, which exaggerate their engagement in society as well as the administrative and leadership skills they have acquired through their professional or academic careers. The electorate should learn not to be so easily influenced, but to see through all this false information and evaluate the real qualifications of these candidates in an objective manner, whether they are already in political positions of power or whether they aspire to be. An informed electorate, which will base their voting decision on critical thinking, can help shape the new political scene and elect politicians who will strive for the common good and positive social results.

   To better illustrate the ideas presented above, we will refer to a 1989 characteristic pre-election promise – “firework” –  which misled and caused a lot of chagrin to thousands of Greek citizens.  In 1982 a new law in support of small businesses was passed, which promised to provide financial support (60% of the total estimated cost) to all new approved projects. This became a very strong incentive for many small businessmen, who rushed to submit all necessary documents and apply for subsidy at the Ministry of Economic Affairs. However, these businessmen did not know something very important:  the annual subsibies would be extremely limited. For years, many such proposals for small investment projects were submitted, but all the businessmen ever received was an official document approving the project, but no actual subsidy! This “firework” was exposed after the elections, when 4/5 of the proposed projects did not get any subsidy , while the remaining 1/5 of the projects were financed with a much smaller amount that the one that had been promised! We believe that many of the present new pre-election approvals of big projects that we often hear about are also of the “firework” type: for the most part there are no real subsidies, but even if there is financing, there is not enough time left between now and the elections to even prepare the feasibility studies and tender out the contracts!

Of course, political maturity is not something that is being inherited; it is a complex  process that is acquired through education and life experience. It should be added that political maturity can be learned mainly through the long-standing and smooth-functioning social institutions. When these institutions are characterised by integrity, they create the right political climate that educates the citizens. In our country, the prolonged economic crisis has proven the defective functioning of the fundamental social institutions, a fact that leads us to self-reflection about our own role in the crisis and also to a common conscientious undertaking in order to avoid new lending and making the same errors of the past. Unfortunately, the information overload, a result of the media omnipresence, is not an asset, particularly during pre-election periods. The information overload forces the average citizen to filter through all this data, and to use critical thinking, so that he/she can distinguish between the essence and the “firework” pre-election promises. The election of the right politicians during the municipal and parliamentary (both Greek and European) elections is the single most important factor for overcoming the economic crisis. Emerging from the present financial crisis does not happen through slogans and political statements, but through an honest, effective, collaborative and cohesive management of our public affairs by the politicians and the political parties that we ourselves will elect.

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT AND SMALL-MINDED MANAGEMENT OF REGIONAL OPERATIONAL PROGRAMMES

2019 MAIN ARTICLES IN ENGLISH, MAIN ARTICLES IN ENGLISH, ΑΠΟ ΤΟ ΦΥΛΛΟ ΠΟΥ ΚΥΚΛΟΦΟΡΕΙ, εφημερίδα

Our country has been a member of the European Union for 35 years and of the Eurozone for almost 20. As such, it participates in the planning of common policies and in the shaping of the institutions that will promote these policies. One of these common European Union policies is the formation of an additional decentralised decision-making level of municipal government, on the regional level, which in our country came into effect in 2010. Problems related to the implementation of this policy surfaced even before it became law, as politicians could not agree on the population and the geographical size of the regions that were about  to be established. Instead of following the corresponding European standards (formation of a small number of socially homogeneous areas with common characteristics), the needs of special interest groups prevailed and in Greece we ended up with 13 regional governments (περιφερειακές αυτοδιοικήσεις). Τhe best example of the irrationality of this kind of planning is what happened in our region: the Peloponnese was cut into two areas and so that the geographical size of the smaller area was increased, it was given a part of Continental Greece. As a result, right from the beginning, the demarcation of the Regional Government of the Peloponnese was saddled with problems which negatively influenced the undertaking of any far-reaching development programmes. This unfortunate demarcation could possibly have been counter-balanced by the effective management of our elected regional politicians. However, a careful examination of the development initiatives during the last eight years demonstrates that this definitely was not the case.

   Slowly but steadily, from 2010 onwards, the management of the regional operational programmes (which until then were run by central state authorities) was transferred to the new regional government politicians, a process which was completed within two years. Thus the regional governments (περιφερειακές αυτοδιοικήσεις) took over the agencies/services of civil works, which were previously organized by departmental governments (νομαρχιακές αυτοδιοικήσεις).  It stands to reason that the regional governments should have been able to run these already undertaken programmes more efficiently, since they could have watched the progress of the works more closely. They could also have watched the progress of the civil works and other initiatives implemented by the 2006-2013 Community Support Framework closely and also planned and promoted the initiatives of the new Community Support Framework for the period 2014-2020. Democratic planning is a principle that was established in our country  in 1986, and which unfortunately was again not followed in this case, because small-minded and special interest politics prevailed. Regional government politicians should have collaborated closely with the municipal politicians, so that common development policies and policies for determining the necessary public works could have been drafted. In this way, a common line could have been agreed upon for both the overseeing of already undertaken works and the materialisation of the newly proposed projects. The small number of local government institutions following the implementation of “Callicrates” (policy for merging of municipalities) would have facilitated direct consultations, integrated application of programming, and common plan of action. Unfortunately, we have not seen any such initiatives and actions in the documentation that we examined. What our regional politicians chose to do instead was to draft their own development planning, and decide by themselves which new public works were necessary. In other words, all planning and implementation of public works was exclusively decided by the regional government authorities (περιφερειακές αυτοδιοικήσεις).

    The 2014-2020 Regional Operational Programme has allotted 250.000.000 € to the Peloponnese, out of which 40% had to be spent on public works. This sum is in addition to the significant public investment programme funds that have been transferred from the central government to the regional government so that local public works can be materialised. If these two sources of funding were to be used effectively, this could considerably improve the infrastructure in Peloponnese. Since it is a fact that tourism in Mani is the main source of income for a very large group of the local population, it is obvious that the public sector and the regional government need to promote tourism infrastructure such as roads, ports and squares that make access easier to landscape assets and cultural heritage sites and thus help bring more tourists to our area. These tourists will patron private businesses, such as hotels, restaurants and places of entertainment. Such initiatives are very scarce and are unfairly and disproportionally allotted to certain local areas. Our local politicians prefer to promote tourism through various activities in national and international presentations and campaigns. These campaigns and the travel expenses of those participating in them have absorbed a high percentage of the funds allocated to our area. Tourism promotion is necessary, however, it needs to be done in a cost-efficient manner, and most importantly, it needs to always showcase the latest tourism infrastructure which has been completed. 

   In conclusion:  the regional development should always start with a sound knowledge of the area and democratic planning for a fair distribution of the proposed public works; it should end with the most efficient management of all available funds. Since we are in a pre-election period, we wish that the politicians who will be soon elected will follow the ideas presented in this article, so that we, the citizens of Mani, can finally see the regional operational programmes run efficiently and the funds allotted to our area used in the best possible way.