Makis Voridis, who served as Minister of Rural Development after the 2019 elections until the beginning of 2021, responds to what was claimed against him by Gregory Varra and the opposition parties. Mr Voridis sent his arguments with e -mail to the New Democracy MPs.
The Borides Mail is as follows:
1. The “Agree” of the 2019 technical solution
The “technical solution” is not a political choice of 2019, but a practice implemented since 2015. Varra, in his deposition, described the “technical solution” of 2019 as an illegal process. The reality, however, is different: the “technical solution” is about the administrative distribution of eligible public pastures in order to activate rights and receive the respective subsidies. The “technical solution” was and remains a perfectly legal tool until the grazing plans are completed, allowing and ensuring the smooth flow of European aid to farmers. It is clear to be considered illegal to apply the “law”, that is, a ministerial decision, which was applied before and after the term Borides.
2. The “agree” of the 2020 technical solution
In 2020, Varra himself – as president of OPECEPE – applied the same “technical solution” that today describes illegal, demanding that the distribution be done in exactly the same way it was made in 2019. After all, he admitted shortly before leaving the organization that he made a “technical” down payment. And the question arises: His own application is considered legal, while Borides is illegal? Therefore, today’s criticism is a complete contradiction – this act completely cancels its arguments.
3. Varra resignation – because it was requested
The former president of OPEKEPE claimed that he was dismissed “by the request of third parties” (Neuropublic, Dimitris Mela, Piraeus Bank) in order not to disclose “illegalities”. One wonders reasonably: What illegalities? The technical solution he himself applied? The checks for which he testified that he had not informed then Minister Makis Voridis? In addition, he did not present any evidence: No document, no testimony, no conversation. Varra resignation was requested in 2020. So then he knew about the illegalities. But to the prosecutor’s office he went in 2024. Why? Was he tolerated illegalities for 5 years? In any case, Makis Voridis has stated that he will be extensively mentioned before the Inquiry Committee on the reason for the resignation of Varra.
4. Representative of interest
Varra hinted “privileged relationships” between Neuropublic and the Borides environment, without any evidence. No testimony, no document, without anything. Only in cases. In addition, Neuropublic, in its official announcement, described its allegations as “absolutely false and slanderous” and announced the submission of documents to the exam. Makis Voridis categorically rejected the claim that he was a “representative of interest”, noting that he never acted in favor of any private body or company. All of his decisions, as Minister of Rural Development, were taken exclusively in the context of his institutional powers, with complete transparency with the sole purpose of legitimacy and the protection of the public interest.
5. Intervention in the terms of the notice
Varra argued that there was intervention in the terms of a technical adviser. The truth is that the control of legality and observations are an institutional obligation of the minister who oversees the Agency. If the supervisory minister, in the context of his responsibilities, makes observations and exerts supervision, this is, according to Mr Vara, – a breach of duty. If you do not supervise and become wrong, you are guilty; if you supervise, guilty again. That logic just doesn’t stand. Further, Varra means that the intervention was made to favor Neuropublic. This company received the work of the Technical Adviser 13 years before the term of office of Voridis. With international bidding processes in which he participated alone. A second company was also involved in the competition raised under the ministry of Voridis for the first time and there was competition. In addition, the notice of this competition was entrusted by NEUROPUBLIC and was considered legal by justice. That is, before Voridis, there was no competitive process. With the “sold out” in Neuropublic Voridis, for the first time, there is competition, and those who are supposedly favoring them are turning against his notice. The events deny Varra.
6. Fines and “pastures”
Varra claimed that fines of € 466 million for which Greece was justified by the European Court of Justice could be converted into “pastures”. How it is possible to convert judicial decisions to fines into land areas is a question in which – it seems – only he has an answer. The amounts concerned old European charges that were offset by other debts and remained about 170 million euros, which reached the state budget. Var’s proposal proves complete ignorance.
7. Maximus’ “non -support”
The impression was that the government spokesman allegedly “emptied” Makis Voridis. The reality: The government, through its representative, did not attribute any responsibility to Voridis. On the contrary, it was made clear that the Inquiry Committee is responsible for investigating the case and that neither criminal nor political responsibility of Makis Voridis emerges. OPECEPE’s issue is a timeless problem. The interpretations of the “license” were described as a distortion of statements and “cutting” of the opposition.