Waste management as a political issue
While in opposition, the refuse crisis was framed as the outcome of specific policy choices and a particular administration.
The public debate on waste management in Corfu has a characteristic that is often overlooked: the way political discourse itself changes depending on one’s position of power. The issue is not the problem per se—which remains—but the way it is interpreted and attributed.
During the period in opposition, the refuse crisis was framed as the outcome of specific policy choices and a particular administration. Responsibility was personalised and directly assigned to the municipal authority of Meropi Ydraiou. The narrative was clear: failure of planning, poor management, lack of competence, and lack of political will. The problem was described as solvable, provided that the people in charge and the mode of governance changed.
At that stage, there was talk of missed opportunities, of solutions that existed but were not implemented, of an image that embarrassed the island. A change in municipal leadership was presented as a prerequisite for resolving the issue, not as one of many contributing factors.
After assuming office, the framework shifted noticeably. Waste management began to be described as a long-standing and structural problem that exceeds the capacities of a single municipality. Responsibility is now dispersed across multiple levels: the state, the institutional framework, infrastructure, bureaucracy, and chronic systemic shortcomings. The issue is no longer personalised but treated as the outcome of accumulated weaknesses.
This shift is not insignificant. It highlights the difference between the discourse of opposition and the discourse of governance. When votes are being sought, the problem appears simple, with clearly defined culprits. When power is exercised, the same problem becomes complex and without specific attribution of responsibility.
GIORGOS KATSAITIS
