The Minister of Climate Crisis and Civil Protection, Giannis Kefalogiannis, participated today in the joint meeting of the Standing Committee on Production and Trade and the Special Standing Committee on Environmental Protection with the agenda item on the elaboration and examination of the draft law of the Ministry of Climate Crisis and Political Protection “Active battle: Comprehensive reform of the system of prevention, preparedness and response to forest fires and other natural, technological or man-made disasters – Provision of mechanisms for drawing operational lessons – Strengthening of the Directorate for Combating Arson Crimes – Upgrading of the Fire Academy – Regulation of issues under the responsibility of the General Secretariat for Disaster Rehabilitation and State Relief and other provisions – Amendments to Law No. 4662/2020, n.4555/2018, n. 4797/2021 and Law No. 5116/2024”.

“Amendments to 4757/2001, 4797/2001, 4797/2001, Amendments to Laws 5116/2024”.

The meeting was also attended by the Deputy Minister of Climate Crisis and Civil Protection, responsible for State Aid, Costas Katsafados.

Kefalogiannis presented the central pillars of the new bill, highlighting the transition from simple reaction to active prevention.

The Minister stressed that for the first time a scientifically based decision-making mechanism is being institutionalized, incorporating modern tools, such as prescribed burning and operational meteorology, through a single chain of command, common understanding and coordination based on rules and not on persons or circumstances.

At the same time, he stressed that institutional organisation alone is not enough if it is not accompanied by high quality information and solid scientific evidence in decision making. For this reason, he presented the importance of strengthening operational meteorology, risk assessment and the use of modern databases as organic tools of the mechanism.

The Minister placed particular emphasis on training, professional formation and institutionally organized volunteerism, noting that the coherent thread of the bill is the transition from fragmentation to interoperability, from improvisation to process and from reaction to constant readiness, which will unite the individual provisions, with the aim of a mechanism that will operate with a common language and absolute discipline in the hour of crisis, with the aim of reducing uncertainty and duplication at a time when every minute is determined

The Minister of Climate Change and Civil Protection said in his speech at the meeting:

“First of all, let me thank all my colleagues, the rapporteurs for their comments, although we may disagree on many of them, but at least I think it can be a good basis for the next discussions of our Committee. Where, of course, I will disagree is on what was said about the consultation of the bill.

Because, listen, ladies and gentlemen, and I want to get this on the record, I announced back in the summer that there would be a comprehensive bill coming forward that would deal with Civil Protection. So it did not come as a bolt from the blue or in a political vacuum. But it was very specific in the tone of the bill.

Before the Bill was tabled for formal consultation, there was a detailed consultation with all the scientific, social bodies as well as the local government. In particular, and I want to put this on the record, with the Central Association of Municipalities and Communities, with the Resilient Cities Network, which was consulted, and with the Union of Regions, where there was a detailed consultation. I believe that tomorrow, when the bodies are invited, they will certify it.

There was consultation with POMIDA, the Panhellenic Federation of Property Owners, with the Greek Agroforestry Network, the Institute of Mediterranean Forest Ecosystems, WWF, the Flame Group of the Observatory, all these scientific bodies that have at times stood, and rightly perhaps, been critical of these phenomena, as well as with the Academy of Athens. Gentlemen, and I refer also to Mr Poulas and other colleagues, if you read the SIA, you will see that the Goldammer Commission is mentioned in multiple places. It has adopted, if not the whole of its comments, most of them. In fact, it was heard about a member of the Goldammer Commission, there was never a member Mr. Gurbatsis.

There may be other cooperation. But, as I recall, Mr. Psyche, I think that on the Goldammer Commission, that person was not on the Goldammer Commission. After all, there was consultation with a number of scientific bodies at the European Union level as well. We adopted recommendations from the National Transparency Authority. The conclusion of the EODASAM of 27 February 2025. At the national level, as I said, the report of the Academy of Athens in terms of forest fires and the resilience of our forests.

In fact, I also sent a letter to the European Commission’s Directorate General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations, just so that they would be aware of the bill as well. And, of course, with all the fire service trade unions, because I will, of course, agree with you that obviously the frontline people should be the ones who will be called upon to implement these provisions as well.

Certainly, at the level of federations, which are also representative. That is why we were able to have, I think, a very good consultation. It was then posted for two weeks for public consultation.

There were 1,258 comments, of which, of course, 52 unique comments were adopted in provisions of the bill, so because it was mentioned by some that there were some articles above, that was the basis of the comments in that consultation. It took another two weeks for the bill to be tabled in the Greek Parliament, and it is coming through a normal process, because I heard from representatives of the Opposition that it is coming through an emergency process. No emergency, I think you are all experienced and you know that we follow the normal legislative procedure. The committee meets today, the stakeholders are invited tomorrow, it takes several days before we go to debate on Monday, it takes another two days to go to second reading, and then we go to plenary. I want to get these things on the record because there have indeed been many times in the past when there have been bad examples of bad legislation by many governments. But at least for this bill, I’m going to give you a frank discussion and say that the process that was followed was an extensive consultation from the beginning. From there, on the substance of the bill, I think we’ll have the opportunity in the other sessions to say a lot more. But as I said earlier, as I said earlier, that consultation was also with the scientific bodies, those who have really dedicated all the knowledge over the last few decades on these issues. There has been a systematic dialogue with all the stakeholders, and I believe that tomorrow this will be reflected in the debate.

But the most important thing of all is that we have managed to get a lot of models, good models, from abroad. Not as a mechanical transfer of these models to Greece, but in essence, in the sense of a common test. We can see that in the Mediterranean, but also in the European continent as a whole, we have, unfortunately, had devastating fires in recent years. It was very rightly mentioned by the New Left, if I remember correctly, that last year we exceeded ten million hectares of forested areas at the European level, which was, unfortunately, the largest area ever burnt in the last forty years.

These, obviously, are bells that will ring, and we need to take them into account in order to give priority to prevention. Now, with respect to the institutional structure upon which this bill comes to respond to issues, to say the following, and I think it was mentioned by the majority leader very appropriately.

Ladies and gentlemen, until 2019, quite simply, there was no Civil Defence in the country. There was no National Crisis Management Mechanism; there was a fragmentation of responsibilities, agencies that were uncoordinated, and, unfortunately, for the first time, we were called in 2020, indeed, to build this mechanism. So we come back six years later, we see what went right in the implementation of this National Mechanism, and we build on it. We do not discover gunpowder; we do not bring a new bill to change the mechanism from scratch. Where we have indeed seen that we need to give more weight, and indeed, you have said so repeatedly in the committees of this House, is in prevention. I have heard similar proposals from PASOK and from SYRIZA, from the New Left and the Communist Party. We all talk about prevention. In fact, this particular bill steps 80%, not to say a little bit more, on what, perhaps, hurts the country the most. On prevention, and we’ll have a chance to go into that later on.

For the first time, for example, the mechanism that was created in 2020 has enabled us to have a comprehensive view of the incidents. The NCCEDIC, which is currently operating within the Ministry of Climate Crisis and Civil Protection, is a very serious mechanism and I think it has proven its effectiveness over the last few years, calling on to manage difficult situations simultaneously. Particularly, in situations like the middle of the summer, when conditions are such that we get multiple incidents. However, it is not only forest fires that the Fire Brigade is called upon to manage during the summer, but there are also many urban fires, and this is often overlooked when we talk about forest fires. In general, we have managed to create a mechanism of this kind, where we have really reached a very good point, and we are coming up with this draft law to improve many points of the mechanism, especially in the area of prevention. Before that, in education, but also after the incidents, in the issue of accountability and transparency. That is, the fact that for the first time it will now be mandatory to submit the report to the Greek Parliament, and from there onwards, a debate will be held, and it will be mandatory after six months, the respective Minister of Climate Crisis and Civil Protection, to bring a Memorandum and say what he did based on the debate in Parliament? I think these are steps that are necessary and should have been taken almost too many years ago, and we will say too many things. You talked a lot about the issue of strengthening the Fire Department.

Ladies and gentlemen, in 2019, the Fire Corps consisted of 13,900 people, male and female; 14,000 were permanent and five-year members, and 900 were seasonal. Last year, 18,000 people were operating, 15,500 permanent and five-year contractors, and 2,500 seasonal five-year contractors. I recall that on my recommendation, the Cabinet approved another 1,076 hires for the year 2026, and because we will have very few retirements, we will approach a record number this year of 19,000. That’s 16,500 will be permanent and five-year appointments, and 2,500 seasonal. But be careful, 16,500 and 2,500. The Fire Corps has 17,481 organic positions. That means that, including seasonal staff, we have 1 700 more than the Fire Brigade’s organic posts. I don’t think there is any other sector of the broader public sector where those who serve, even for the 8 months, actually overlap the organic positions that exist by such a large percentage.

Also, in 2022, the Ministry’s budget was 585 million. The budget passed by the House of Representatives in December for the year 2026 is at 1,460 million, which is an increase of over 100%, 140%, in just four years. What does this show, ladies and gentlemen? That we are investing both in the human factor and, of course, in money for prevention. That is to say, the rapid treatment of incidents is needed. So, obviously, beyond the provisions, because it was heard that provisions seem to be made, but there are no legs underneath to support them. The legs, Mr. Psyche, Colleagues, are what I am describing to you.

Mr. Psyche, Mr. Colleague, they are what I am describing to you and the staff, and the funding. I recall that in a previous bill with respect to staff we had a number of provisions that dealt with their care. I recall we tripled the evening meals, the salaries, the allowances, there we doubled as appropriate for both seasonal and permanent and five-year staff. We come here and talk about the days off, which have been increased from 16 to 24. These are salary increases for the corps manpower. I’m not talking about the broader projections, anyway, of the government’s salary increases for the uniformed services. I’m talking specifically about the fact that we’re coming here and legislating. So obviously there’s the concern and of course a lot of other things that we’ll talk about later.

You hear a lot of times and you hear the criticism today that we’re putting more emphasis on suppression and not prevention. I think I’ve said enough about that, but I do want to say on the issue of prevention that it obviously cannot stand on its own if it is not already supported by a reliable and an adequate response mechanism.

First you build the mechanism, to be able to deal with the events and of course you also put your weight on prevention and we are coming this to fill the gap today. Of course, prevention, you know, by itself, does not reduce the likelihood and intensity of a risk, it does not actually reduce it to zero, but what it comes to do is to button up together with the suppression of the incident, the natural phenomenon and together with the restoration to form the three phases of a holistic response plan concerning this phenomenon of natural disasters. So what we are coming to restore is in essence with this bill, a system that can withstand the incident so that it has both the time and the knowledge and the security so that it can invest substantially in prevention.

And again, prevention, we’ve said it repeatedly in this Chamber. But the draft law that we will be discussing these days seeks for the first time to put it in a holistic dimension, not as a theoretical or bureaucratic exercise, but in fact an institutional tool that will translate into a national planning with specific local options, because each region has its own specificity in this matter, priorities in specific timeframes but above all a clear allocation of roles and the question of responsibility.

I think it is needless to say that the risk is not limited by geography nor by time, but unfortunately, often exceeds local plans and even regional plans. Therefore, for proactive planning to be implemented, it must also be combined with operational readiness and command in the field. That is why, moreover, with this draft law we are introducing the Regional Crisis Management Centres, which in essence, to respond, but I think they will also have the opportunity in the article debate, to tell you that there has obviously been a change in planning and in relation to the original planning of the pharaonic projects of the RCPCs, which was not operationally correct at the moment, the first role is played by the fire brigade and from there onwards all the relevant bodies, as is the case with the NCCEDCs, will be in the regional centres in the 13 small NCCEDCs in each region so that there is a common understanding and a common operational picture of what is happening.
.

Also, there should be a single other order of command and coordination. That is why we are doing the specific centres. And also in the same framework, namely prevention, all these tools that are mentioned in the bill, such as prescribed burning, for example, and contingent grazing. These are proposals that a centre-right government is not going to do. They are also proposals that WWF has argued for, and many other organisations and collectives have argued for. It is not something that we come across and suddenly discover a new world. And I think that these entities will also submit them to the Commission.

Also, we are establishing clear rules of engagement and incident management for one reason only. Many officers, it has been a standing request that fire department officers have, a Sword of Damocles is hanging over their heads at the slightest thing to go to the prosecutor. So when the specific rules of engagement are in place, meaning what protocols and what should be followed, every officer, every officer will know what they should do so that at least based on those specific standards and experience, the right thing is done and they are not constantly at the prosecutor’s door accused of these cases, with the slightest thing. Also, the effectiveness of a modern Civil Protection mechanism is not only made by its structure but also by the quality of the information on which decisions are made. We are adopting pioneering provisions, that is, we are putting meteorology at the centre of operations. Unit 7, the 7th Unit, which is pyrometeorology, is being created, again, one of the key proposals of both the Commission and the National Observatory, which is one of the main proposals, and in this way, we have scientific knowledge at the time of the event, which is extremely valuable and helps the operational players. As well as the Flood Risk Assessment Committee, something that was lacking in the country. We have an excellent Risk Assessment Committee, but in terms of flood risk, unfortunately, there was a gap in scientific knowledge. This is now organically integrated as part of the operational effort.

We are utilizing the national database, which all public agencies are now required to have, to put their data in a national database to know at any given time and by region and specific spatial point, what it includes, some critical infrastructure, what we need to protect faster, to have an update of the data. Municipalities are also required to have detailed and public prevention plans, and they are also combined with the specific database, which is something towards transparency for citizens. Will anyone be able to go in and see in their area what prevention plans the municipalities have made? Are the hydrants working? Are the escape plans working? All these things that should normally go without saying, and we are still coming here today to discuss them. All of this is in the context of the transparency and cooperation that we have as a central government, local government, and citizens.

There is also a lot of emphasis on the issue of education, on professional formation, I think on this at least, from what I understood from the initial statements, there is a broader consensus. We can look at the details later on, but that too the restructuring of the Fire Academy is not just an administrative change. The point is that we are going in a higher education direction, with tenured faculty members, with the right to do graduate work, research, and doctoral degrees being in place, knowledge being produced, and staying at the Fire Academy. This is something that, in my opinion, should go without saying; it hasn’t been until today, and we come along and legislate it. Volunteerism. I have said repeatedly that we place a very high value on both the volunteers of the fire service and the volunteers of the Civil Protection. I recall that in December, there was a joint ministerial decision with the Ministry of Finance and specifically with the Deputy Minister, Mr. Kotsiras, where we exempted from road tax all vehicles of civil protection organisations that are registered in the register. As a minimum token of recognition beyond the moral and financial recognition of these organizations.

We are coming for the first time, and providing that the central government is, in a certain way, that is transparent, those who are on the register will be able to equally allocate some of the expenses of these organizations to cover expenses like fuel, transit, and possibly tolls. There is a provision in the budget, I think we said it during the vote, around 600,000, which means that around 2,500 to 3,000 per organization will be eligible for this funding. For the first time, the state is coming in. Previously, what used to happen was that it would go to the municipalities, the municipalities, in a way that was not entirely legitimate, would try to cover some of these costs, and in essence, we had a foggy landscape. So we come and we recognize their contribution and of course we are in constant contact with them to see other incentives, because we really believe very much in the voluntary movement, because as many recruitments and if we recruit permanent staff, such is the geomorphology of our country and the insularity and mountainousness, that we de facto need more people in the field and because there is indeed a philanthropy from our people, I believe that we can attract a lot of people in the issue of volunteerism. But of course, they must have a specific role, training that the state will come to provide, specifically the Civil Protection Academy, that they have safe conditions of operation, that there is no risk to their physical integrity, and of course, that there is not an occasional and fragmented use of them.

In closing, ladies and gentlemen, I will say that at least if there is one thing we can agree on, it is that the risks that we have seen in previous years from natural disasters are something that, unfortunately, will be with us in the years to come. So we, as a central state, have to, on the one hand, make the necessary legislation so that there are all the institutional tools and funding, as I said, in all three phases of dealing with natural disasters, which are prevention, response, and recovery. We have to give the tools to the municipalities, and we will really be very happy to hear tomorrow from their representatives to give us their proposals and tell us how they see the bill as well. Because they are, along with the firefighters, the ones who are on the front lines of responding to incidents.

I’ll also remind you, we said in the fire report that since May of this year, probably last year 2025, through the end of October, 5,250 fire starts were responded to. I say that because it’s a huge number that both the fire service and the civil protection mechanism in general, and the municipalities and the regions are called upon to deal with every year. Usually we stand at 10-15 more major ones that also give the disasters, but for people to understand in the effort that is made, in addition to these 50-40 perhaps that give the disasters, we have another 5,200 that have been prevented, that have been extinguished in less than two hours possibly or an hour and have caused no disaster or at least very little disaster. And I think that’s what we ought to say and emphasize, and it was very rightly heard in this petition that it’s no coincidence that the Greek firefighter and the Greek firefighter at this time are held in the highest esteem by the Greek people precisely for this contribution. So we will have the opportunity to speak in the other meetings, I think in detail.

The Ministry is also open to specific proposals on the specific articles. And I think, and I will close with this, that as the necessary time was given for consultation with both the social stakeholders and with all the participants, and proposals were actually adopted as such in this bill, we will have the opportunity to see if there are improvements subsequently and if proposals are heard in the parties of the major and minor and the opposition in general on these issues, to adopt those proposals.

Thank you very much.