The Government of Spain has knocked out two loyal accomplices in just a few days, revealing, once again, the terrible seams of the political class and the low competition of the current rulers. The fragility that is inferred from this way of doing things does not, of course, contribute to generating confidence in a time of crisis and uncertainty. It also reveals the centuries-old weakness of Valencians as a political subject, of course.
The Executive of Sanchez, in the midst of a permanent trickle of calls to the unit, hit one of his own, one of the most faithful, hard to Ximo Puig, by alighting 3.5 million Valencians from phase 1 without any other explanation, to date, that mispayer excuses and a handful of plot contradictions. The initial anger of the Honorable Molt and the consellera Ana Barceló they showed disappointment at the government’s unexpected betrayal. Not for nothing did Barceló reveal conversations in which the move to phase 1 of our entire territory was taken for granted from Madrid. In the end, the ninguneo was imposed, as so many others in the past have done, of all colors and conditions, and the Valencians were used as a bargaining chip to fit other political pacts difficult to justify before public opinion, and in passing to minimize the impact of leaving Madrid and Catalonia in the caboose. Hours after their monumental anger, Puig and Barceló lowered their tone and demand, as disciplined boys from Ferraz’s party, as always.
The lament of citizenship was not so much to pass the phase. Objectively, in this ocean of patience, discipline and perplexity in which we live immersed, what difference does it make another week? The problem was and is the vexatious treatment from the Government that has been perceived in all sectors of Valencian society, the enormous disappointment, after weeks of doing things well, and also the lack of recognition of the hard work of Puig, Barceló and their teams, and their good results. Neither Sanchez, neither Illa, neither Simon They gave explanations endorsed by documents and technical criteria, nor will they give them, because they cannot. Does anyone think of such a grievance with the Basque Country, for putting a case? We all know that Sánchez himself had gone out of his way immediately to lick the Lehendakari’s boots at the foot of the Gernika tree, as a sign of apology. We instead … not pintem fava. Any questions?
It is not worth going into the whys of Sánchez and his Valencian dolphin, Ábalos. For the moment it is worth noting the facts: the government’s hard and dry left hook to Puig and, by extension, to the group of Valencians of whom it is the highest representative. And the enormous political clumsiness that it reveals.
As if that were not enough, the reprimand of the Minister of Finance was missing, Maria Jesus Montero, to Joan Baldoví. Accuse him of making up “problems that don’t exist” (referring to the distribution of funds to the autonomies) or dizzy with Valencian underfunding was embarrassing, but above all it was to do it with that unrepentant, cool and vehement tone. The jab Baldoví’s chin hurt, he made a face of not believing what he was listening to, and at the same time he managed to help thousands of Valencians who have never voted for Compromís. The anger in the party ranks was as monumental as his reaction was naive. In politics, it is negotiated and agreed behind the scenes and, when an agreement is reached, it is made public. Compromís has done it the other way around: with the heater still on his body, he has launched a public order to Sánchez that he cannot accept and with this he has entered an alley from which he will only be able to flee.
This new chapter of the (growing) disagreement between Valencia and Madrid has deprived us of a necessary, deep and serene debate: why do we go from very strict confinement to opening bars? I do not know about you, but I, who have seen the management of the crisis, with exceptions, quite arbitrary, this now I find a rant. Either one opted before for a too strict confinement or now one opts for a somewhat frivolous de-escalation. Going from funerals with a maximum of three people to barbecues of up to ten reveals terrible arbitrariness. Before and now.
–
