“He also claimed that he was dismissed in order not to ‘disclose illegalities’. I ask: What illegalities? The technical solution he himself applied? “
Former Minister of Rural Development and Food, Makis Voridis, with his post leaves spikes Against the former President of OPEKEPE Gregory Varra, responding to his testimony to the Inquiry Committee. Mr Voridis rejects the dismissal of Mr Varra at the request of Neuropublic, Mr. Dimitris Mela and Piraeus Bank.
“What elements support this claim? Is there any testimony, conversation or document to confirm it? No mention. Another theoretical construction, without real background, “he says, among other things, in his post.
The whole post of Maki Voridis:
From the testimony of Mr Varra, we heard today that it was at the request of Neuropublic, Mr. Dimitris Mela and Piraeus Bank. But one wonders: What elements support this claim? Is there any testimony, conversation or document to confirm it? No mention. Another theoretical construction, without real background.
After all, if he really wanted to be honest, he would mention the real reason why I asked him for his resignation. We met and chatted extensively. Don’t remember what I told him? And, of course, none of those he invokes has ever called for his removal.
Mr Varra also claimed that he was fired in order not to “reveal illegalities”.
I wonder: What illegalities? The technical solution he himself applied? The checks for which he testified that he had not informed me? Or the announcement of the technical adviser conducted on Theophanes Pappas, was offended by Neuropublic and was eventually found to be legal by justice? Are these, the “revelations” to which it is mentioned?
Regarding my supposed “illegalities”, I repeat for many times: How can the implementation of a ministerial decision be considered illegal?
Mr Varra himself confessed that he applied the same technical solution to the temporary payment of 2020. My application is considered illegal, while his own legal? This is obviously a reasonable contradiction.
He also argues that it is a breach of duty that I have submitted observations on the notice of the technical adviser. If the supervisory minister, in the context of his responsibilities, makes legal observations and exerts supervision, is this – according to Mr Varas – 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.
Finally, a new argument, as the previous ones are obviously not enough: the 466 million euros that were supposedly “lost”. What about these amounts?
There were two rulings by the European Court of Justice, which have fined fines against Greece. Mr Varra argued that these amounts could be “converted” into acres of pasture. In exactly what way? How are court rulings converted to land fines? A question in which – from what seems – only he has an answer.
The reality is simple: out of € 466 million, money was offset with other debts and remained 170 million euros. This money was not lost. They were deposited – not in my days, but later – to the state account, for the benefit of Greek taxpayers.
That was not the reason I asked Mr War’s resignation. However, the reporting of both non -existent and technically inappropriate allegations could alone justify it.
The rest, and in full analysis, will be presented before the Inquiry Committee.