Accusations against PASOK, which he calls on to “take a more honest and courageous stand on today’s and tomorrow’s problems”, were made in a post by State Minister Akis Skertsos.

The reason for the minister’s statement is the heated dialogue he had with Anna Diamantopoulou on educational issuesin the context of the Delphi Economic Forum.

As A. Skertsos, “I honor and respect Anna Diamantopoulou for her enduring contribution to Greek and European affairs. However, during our discussion at the Delphi Forum on Friday on the new Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation that the government is planning, she submitted two inaccuracies that in a way also illuminate the strategic political deadlock of PASOK.

What were they?

The first was that 150,000 “perpetual students” were expelled in 2011-2012 during her tenure for the first time at the universities. She cited this when I argued that since 2019 we have been wrestling with many anachronisms of the past that we have now removed so that we can now talk about a more modern university environment.

What is the truth? The provision for deletion of “perpetual students” was indeed in the Diamantopoulou law. However, it was never implemented. This is evidenced both by the absence of relevant administrative acts in the archives of the universities and by the reports of the time.

But also by the fact that the first and to date only deletion of 308,605 “perpetual students” took place at the end of 2025 by the Mitsotakis government, bringing to the surface records even from the 1940s.

If there had indeed been deletions in 2011-2012, shouldn’t the outright registrations from the middle of the last century have been deleted from the registers, at least?

The second inaccuracy said is that the Diamantopoulou law was in fact annulled by ND in 2014. The truth, however, is that ND at that time was in coalition with PASOK. With university professor Evangelos Venizelos as its president.

Have they discussed internally in PASOK what the reasons were for not defending and implementing this law? Were there any regulations that were deemed to be unimplementable?Have PASOK’s positions changed after 2012 regarding the issues of organization, administration and operation of higher education? No one knows.

What we do know, however, is that even though several years late – due to the disastrous SYRIZA government in public education – many of the critical regulations of the Diamantopoulou law were re-legislated. Mostly, however, they were implemented. In other words, they were not left on paper. And this, like it or not, was done by the self-ruling government of New Democracy and Kyriakos Mitsotakis.

It would therefore be more meaningful for dear Anna Diamantopoulou, before criticizing New Democracy, to first make sure whether her views are acceptable within PASOK.”

Following his post, the Minister of State recalls that “non-state universities were also an emblematic position of PASOK.

However, in the crucial debate of the 2007-2008 constitutional revision, PASOK voted against the relevant proposal made by ND at the time for Article 16. Similarly, it also voted against the 2024 Pierrakaki law, citing alleged constitutionality issues, even though it was eventually ruled constitutional by the CoE.

In any case, in a debate concerning the knowledge economy and the creation of a ministry-headquarters that will lead our country’s transition to it, it is at least counterproductive to “cry over the spilled milk”.

The world around us is running at a rapid pace. Discussions concerning the present and the future lend themselves to consensus without sterile partisan debates. That is why selfish partisan appropriation of the reform agenda for a better higher education in purely tautological terms, however belied by historical data, does not contribute to shaping the future.

Short-sighted accusations of who is to blame as to the lost opportunities of the past decades do not add to the public debate.Only if they lead to political self-awareness and historical memory for sincere consensus and real ruptures.

So instead of urging us to vindicate PASOK for what it did or offered in the past – which had its good and several bad moments – it ought to do a more honest introspection about its achievements.

From the opposition we expect, first and foremost, that the opposition should take a more honest and courageous stance on the problems of today and tomorrow, instead of constantly reminiscing about a “lost paradise”… Which in fact never existed.

And the position at the recent congress of many PASOK executives to cooperate with other parties of the left, which have even more anachronistic positions on public education, will inevitably lock it into them,” he also believes and concludes:

“On the new Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation that is being established, which is a necessary political and organisational breakthrough, we will come back with a more specific note in view of the announcements of the Commission that has been set up for this purpose.

I hope and trust that this major change in our educational affairs will find the support of the opposition.”