Mr. President,
I thank the representatives of the parties because, as usual, the open debate was conducted at a high level and did not drift off course.
For the sake of good order, I would like to make a statement in the public part of the session regarding the Prime Minister of the country.
It is understood that the presence of a Minister and the actions taken by a Minister in informing the representatives of the parties are done in the name and at the behest of the head of government.
It cannot and will never be otherwise. And of course a government’s perception is always uniform. And I would like to say something that springs to mind: unless my memory is serving me incorrectly, at no time has anyone's patriotism been questioned by this government.
We may have disagreements over the handling of issues, we may have disagreements on specific positions when debating specific legislation or treaties, but the government always takes everyone's patriotism for granted.
Woe betide if it were any other way, and in this regard the Prime Minister of the country has repeatedly stated the need for national unanimity.
As one has to be fair, I would like to say that, to a very large extent, although we have gone through periods of extreme acrimony, the national parliamentary debate has been maintained at a high level of seriousness and competence.
As regards the issues raised by Mr. Loverdos, I will respond to him in the Plenary Session. I will be here the day after tomorrow to answer your question. I have taken notes on the other issues raised, Mr. President, and I will answer them in the closed part of our meeting.
July 13, 2022