Ε. Conclusions Findings Recommendations up to this day there does not appear to have been any serious lack of funds. There were however, and potentially still are, delays in the absorption and use of the available funds, as well as shortages and gaps in the mechanisms and the audit and payment procedures. The method in which EU and national funds were managed is on its own a particular, and very important issue, which might potentially be the subject of a separate investigation. The problem was not social either. The local society, despite the fact that it is put to the test for the eighth consecutive year of an acute economic crisis with distinct and clear elements now of a humanitarian crisis, was quick to react. From the diverse solidarity groups, and all types of associations to the more institutional NGOs and the municipalities (with a few exceptions), the local society tried to help in any way it could the thousands of people crossing the Aegean Sea on a daily basis, reaching the islands and then mainland Greece. However, the inability of the State to create and convincingly promote to the society a uniform, cohesive narrative with specific characteristics, commitments, time limits and measurable results, sooner or later led to disappointment, suspicion, and sometimes open rupture. This of course does not mean that the Greek administration was capable of fully responding and efficiently addressing the challenges of a crisis inside the crisis; the issue for Greece and for Europe was and remains primarily political. In summary, the EU as a whole, and by extension Greece, were unready, because they did not manage to formulate in time a clear and consistent political position regarding what the exact problem is, what are the separate needs, what are the desirable solutions and what would be in the end the appropriate political, economic and technical tools to achieve them. The formulation of such a cohesive political framework, the timely preparation of a strategic plan, the selection of effective and flexible tools and the rational allocation of funds would multiply the operational capacity of the Administration. Housing and food, for example, are neither a purely technical nor a strictly managerial issue. The selection of the camps and food distribution plans are a clearly political decision, regardless if it was actually made on political terms or it was a reaction to an emergency need. And as a political decision it has in turn clear political consequences. The stay of thousands of people for months in inappropriate 92 conditions is a message that the living conditions are not ideal for attracting other migrants. This message has two recipients: initially the residents of the camps themselves, who are constantly decreasing, since some of them potentially find a way to leave the country, as well as the broader public within and outside the borders. In recent years, this theory was put to the test with the administrative detention of all irregular migrants up to 2015, over a span of many months, often in unsuitable conditions, as the Greek Ombudsman had ascertained. However, the attempt to discourage irregular migrants, through the harsh conditions of their treatment, beyond the risks for the fundamental right to the humane treatment, was proven ineffective, as demonstrated by the constantly growing numbers of irregular entries into the country in 2014, and the wave of mass inflows of the second half of 2015. Today, the issue is not whether the tents will be replaced with containers, neither if the food will be cooked/purchased by the army nor distributed by an NGO. The truly important issue is the existence of these fenced accommodation facilities themselves, the risk of ghettoisation or institutionalisation, the segregation, the familiarisation of society with camps where certain foreigners live far from the locals, under the moderate or less moderate surveillance of the authorities, until one day they leave, preferably peacefully and quietly. And finally the issue is the replacement of these facilities with living terms and conditions that favour the smooth integration into society - for the duration of the accommodation, whether it is short or long. Accommodation of the few thousands of people remaining in Greece in regular apartments and houses within the urban fabric or in the countryside, giving them the ability to buy themselves their daily supplies, food, etc. from the local market, the education of children,265 the employment of the adults and the encouragement of everyone’s participation in social, cultural and economic activities, are all political issues, in the sense that they require the formulation of a consistent policy before the selection of the means and the time of its implementation. Similarly in the case of unaccompanied minors, the example of the absence of a guardianship framework, that cancels in practice any attempt for provision of care, is characteristic. Thus, during the open borders period, the absence of any 265 The ambivalence observed in education, is inevitably linked to the generally ambiguous attitude of the Greek State, regarding the degree and the speed of integration into the Greek society of the refugee and migrant populations that arrived in recent years (with recognition of rights and creation of the corresponding institutional frameworks).