Monday, 21 July 2008

ENG: Zapatero v.s. Catalonia?

Some political parties try to change their profile and present new ideas to win votes. For PSC, the Catalan sister party ot Zapatero’s PSOE, it is the other way around. The electorate's support for them is stronger than ever – in the latest elections to the Spanish parliament, four of five new seats for the socialists were won in Catalonia and, at the Generalitat, Montilla manages to hold together his tripartit government, in spite of internal convulsions within his coalition partner Esquerra – but what are their visions for the future?

This weekend I thought that I would have a chance to learn more, since PSC held their congress, but I was disappointed. For example, to remedy the current crisis, it is well known that they want to invest more in infrastructure, but what progress can be made as long as they rule together with parties which are firmly against the planned fourth ringroad around Barcelona and the high-tension connection with France (el quart cinturó and la línia de molt alta tensió (MAT), respectively, in Catalan)?

Instead, media as well as the party’s own web-page seem to focus on the allegedly firm message which Montilla sent to Zapatero: That the Catalan socialists like him but that they like Catalonia even more. That PSC are discontent with what they have seen from Spanish finance minister Pedro Solbes’ draft on how to change the allocation of public funds between the autonomous communities. And that Zapatero must stand up for the statute of autonomy of Catalonia (l’estatut) since he is taking pride for being one of its creators.

During the congress, PSC decided to continue to form part of the socialist group of the Spanish Parliament, and not to create a separate one. Critics interpret this as a signal that the party does not want to be independent from PSOE but, personally, I do not care much about such symbols in politics. Instead, I look forward to the coming discussions on the public finances.

PSC is in charge of a Catalonia which has a big and growing budget deficit, but at the same time transfers a lot of money to other autonomous communities, which receive funds since they are considered poor but still manage to run surpluses in their budgets. To make the central governments’ allocation models more generous to Catalonia might not be Zapatero’s dream project, but for PSC it is a necessity and absolutely in its own interest. Today, representatives of PSC and the main Catalan opposition group, CiU, will meet up to try to agree on a common Catalan approach for the coming negotiations in Madrid.

To sum up, the congress did not answer whether PSC will dare to mark their independence from PSOE, but the coming few months will. And Montilla will have to reveal his sympathies – are they with Zapatero or, above all, with the citizens of Catalonia?
- - -

Related media: LaVanguardia 1, 2, 3; Avui 1, 2, 3
- - -

Technorati tags: CiU, Catalonia, Montilla, PSOE, PSC, Spain, Zapatero,

10 comments:

mai9 said...

the PSC and PSOE current merge is not about symbols, it's about whether they have to vote the same in the spanish congress, or if they can vote differently.

Erik Wirdheim said...

Mai9,

Thanks for your comment.

I took a bit of a shortcut here, and will look over the text. In my eyes the negative comments are made to a symbolic decision since the congress left the door open for the creation of a separate group if that would be needed, or did I misunderstand that part?

//Erik

mai9 said...

AFAIK, they left this issue as it was in the previous congress. The door to create the group "is there", but they don't intend to use it. And the critics want to use it.

Erik Wirdheim said...

Mai9,

I understand. And that is why I see the group in itself as a "symbol". Why have a group if your politics does not require for it?

Those critical to PSC's activities should focus on actual politics and not waste time on symbols, that is my opinion.

//Erik

mai9 said...

and what I mean is that their actual politics DO require a group because today they can't vote differently than PSOE.

Erik Wirdheim said...

Mai9,

With that I assume that you mean their politics as YOU WANT it to be.

If THEY (= the PSC congress majority) would have felt a need to distance themselves from Zapatero's politics, I am confident that they would have a separate group by now.

//Erik

mai9 said...

I wasn't talking if it was ME or THEY. I was saying that (no matter who) it is not a matter of symbols whether THEY live inside the PSOE's group or they have a group by THEMselves.

Let me quote YOU and explain better MYself:

"And that is why I see the group in itself as a "symbol". Why have a group if your politics does not require for it?"

Having a group is not a symbol. It does have consequences in real actual day-to-day politics.

In the post you say that you don't care much about such symbols in politics and that you look forward to the coming discussions on the public finances. But you know what? Whether they have a group or not, the public finances discussion will change.

I hope this explains better my first comment, and clears out that I wasn't showing a position on what THEY should do.

Erik Wirdheim said...

Mai9,

As I see it, PSC currently manages to be firm in the discussion about the public finances, without having an own group (but not closing the door to creating one if needed). And that is what I thought they would be capable of doing already when I wrote the original entry.

I think that you and me will have to realize that we do not share the same perspecive on the value for PSC of having an own group at this time and will not reach further by trying to prove to each other who is right and who is not.

However, thank you for challenging my text - that is a necessity in order for me to develop.

//Erik

mai9 said...

I insist that it's not the perspective of the value for the PSC having a group that made me comment.

The PSC manages to be firm in the discussion of finances. And that's very nice if you want. But having a group is a different story. I think you are mixing it with the finances the same way you mix it with my pressumed desire that they have a group.

The formal position of the PSC related to PSOE has consequences, in the same way that sharing your bedroom with someone else does. It doesn't mean that you can't watch tv or read a book. But sharing your bedroom makes things different, and you can still be the same person with the same desires or ambitions in life.

Let's see if this example makes things clear. ;)

Erik Wirdheim said...

Mai9,

I get your point but still stand by my original entry.

//Erik