Galery

1

It is impossible for us, as citizens, to find out that we are buying natural gas at prices 30% higher than those in other countries in Europe or that the success story of the government may pose a problem to the European Commission. This can be called a completely superficial attitude towards things. Even if there are backstage developments, they are the responsibility of the government. It played a leading role in negotiating how we would buy natural gas and in what way.

The Drasi party is an advocate of the idea of ​​market liberalization and of the development of a free market economy. How do you think the liberalization of the energy sector should be completed and the gas issue addressed?

We are "for" the privatization but it must be carried out through specifying and observing rules and laws, and in a transparent manner. A basic prerequisite is to create a proper legal framework for the market activity before the start of privatizations. This applies not only to the gas company DEPA but also to the companies that manage water distribution, electricity and all other state monopolies that are to be sold.

We are opposed to replacing a government monopoly with a new private monopoly or oligopoly. This means that more than two or three companies must provide a service and compete for the consumers. A simple sale that will help the state monopoly pass into private hands for the sole purpose of bringing a sum of money to the treasury is an inadequate and ineffective action. As you can see, at the moment, the amount that we will receive from the sale is significantly lower than the fair value of the state companies due to the present conditions. This is certainly not a success.

Does this mean that the tender for the sale of the gas company was incorrect from the start, because the four companies that were interested should have obtained and should have actually become the new owners of DEPA?

Yes, it does. Let us explain it more clearly. One of the problems that spoilt the deal with Gazprom is the obligations of some of the customers (large industrial enterprises) to DEPA and some questions have emerged in this respect.
 
How did it turn out that, all of a sudden, the Greek government had given the potential buyer special guarantees for the unpaid obligations to DEPA? Should the government have given the same guarantees to another investor, not only to Gazprom? Why had these details been hidden until the last moment and come to the surface after the failure of the deal?

Obviously, we showed complete mediocrity in creating the tender and absolute opacity in the implementation of the procedures. If there are clear rules on how the energy market in Greece should act, whether we are talking about natural gas, electricity or renewable energy, we will be able to attract more investors who will have equal access to information which will enable us to achieve the best possible result. When an investor is unaware of the conditions under which he should operate in the market after the privatization and how, he will not risk a single euro.

The government and the Privatization Agency denied having given guarantees for the repayment of outstanding obligations of private customers to DEPA. Here there are some unclear points for us, as outsiders. Can you tell us whether there are government guarantees or not?

The situation is not clear to us either. The first official announcement by the Deputy Minister of Energy had left us with the impression that the government had given Gazprom guarantees as regards the payment of the full amount of overdue obligations of customers to DEPA. Then, Gazprom made it clear that they had not received guarantees for the payment of all obligations but only for some of them. Finally, the Privatization Agency, which is the third factor in the deal, has firmly denied having given any guarantees by saying that there is no investment without any risk.

There has been no specific message related to the issue from the Greek side but it is clear that the government had given some guarantees in one way or another. The problem is that this whole process has excluded from the tender other local and foreign investors who might have expressed interest in the deal.

The statements of the Prime Minister show that he recognizes, perhaps unwittingly, that he was surprised by Gazprom’s withdrawal from the tender since there was a deal. Here comes the question of "How could you have agreed since the tender is not over yet?", which means that something was wrong from the start.