I was on holiday for a fortnight. Sort of. So long had it been that I had quite forgotten what it meant. Not having to do things? Impossible. Not having to take note of great events? Likewise inconceivable.
I had been around for Brexit, much though I attempted to ignore the referendum, as I had for the many months leading up to it. When it happened, it was like a bereavement. However much you tried to shut it out, it would come back, constantly nagging away. Mind you, that only lasted a day. The replacement feeling was a mixture of anger and great amusement. The UK had taken a momentous decision courtesy of the naked ambitions of two Conservative politicians, the Murdoch and Desmond press, the unremitting ranting and racism of social media, and a whole bunch of lunatics who, having voted one way, then said sorry we were only having a laugh, can we do it again.
Johnson was gone, his inner buffoon laid bare for all to despise. Gove stepped up, his two brains cancelling themselves out. A man for change? No one believed him. Opportunistic did not do justice to his motives. A plague on both his and Johnson's houses, of which there are doubtless more than one apiece. Then there was Farage, Falstaffian Farage - vain, boastful, drunken and ultimately the architect of his own repudiation, having led the Prince Hal of the nation astray: a pied piper of distant Huguenotism, the piper at the gates of dawn of some new and ill-defined era.
Dave went as Dave had to go, falling on the sword of a trap that Falstaff had set for him. Dave's Europeanism will now extend merely to his holidays in the Balearics. No more, though, will we see the photo opps of him and Sam in relaxed holiday mode, sipping a cortado, Dave forever in that absurd blue sensible shirt he has reserved for holidaying in hot climes. Instead, we may catch a glimpse of Theresa's kitten heels. Theresa with an "h". What does it represent? A more drunken, all but dissolute-appearing Ken Clarke was caught by Sky saying she had spent too long at the Home Office. "Knows nothing about foreign affairs." God forbid.
"The Sun" had previously boiled it down to a two-horse race: one between a stallion heading for the knacker's yard and a sprightly filly coming up on the rails. "It's bonking Boris versus kitten-heeled Theresa," it announced, neglecting the eggheadedness of gruesome Gove. How long in the planning had been the Boris denouement? A useful idiot used to foster a personal end. Boris was not for bonking. Boris was bonked. Zap! Pow! Only Gove can save the Gotham City of post-Brexit Britain. How wrong he was to be.
Amidst this carnage came Chilcot. The Blair Witch Project was finally revealed for what it was. His desert adventuring with George W and the irrelevant "little friend" Aznar was an exercise of dubious legitimacy, imbued with the machismo of Bush's insane tendency to go running in the Arizona desert when the mercury struck 100F. How analogous it was. Politicians lead and take decisions predicated on dissembling; even lying. Momentous moves are made with nary a clue as to the outcome. Plan B? What Plan B? More tellingly, Plan A. What Plan A? Still, that's democracy for you.
Ah yes, democracy. Remember that? The Spanish were exercising their democratic rights once more. Yet again they failed to announce a winner. Not for one moment that this was the fault of the electorate. A four-way split. Spain split four ways, not knowing which way to turn. By default ending up where it had been in all likelihood, with Mariano determined to go on and on for all time.
Within this unpalatable smörgasbord of rejection were the little local battles: those of Balearic, small-islands' politicians. And what did the buffet offer? If one looks closely, one discovers that the eco-nationalists Més were annihilated. Bonked. Their vote disappeared, evaporated by a power-grabbing Podemos whim of electoral alliance. Its main face, Biel Barceló, the man with the old light-blue suit that seemed to have frayed even more overnight, was chastened. Or should have been. There again, he had matters of import to attend to. The tourist tax arrived and in the scheme of things was a minor sideshow, glossed over by Barceló's ridiculous mantras of 1.4% and others. Mere pennies as the pound slid. He hadn't seen that coming. More fool the politician who fails to plan for the worst-case scenario.
Through all this were the connections and threads. They make Brexit the more unconscionable. Brexit impacts tourists and trade, impacts the introduction of a petty local tax. And for Spain, there is the thread from Aznar's siding with Blair. It begat the Madrid bombs and his electoral defenestration in 2004. No one saw that coming either.
Showing posts with label General election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label General election. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Friday, May 27, 2016
Singing For Balearic Independence
It's not easy attempting to explain to the uninitiated what a glosador is and does. Can it be defined as singing? Is it a vaguely melodic monologue? What is he/she going on about? In order to answer the last of these one would need to have a firm grasp of (typically) rural Mallorquín, its various accents and the degree to which it is being spoken/sung with what can seem like an imaginary potato in the mouth. As I, and I expect most of you, do not possess such a tight hold over the local and the variants thereof, then the explanation becomes doubly difficult. Pretty much impossible in fact. And if one tosses in (more than just metaphorically) the barely disguised onanism of the playing of the ximbomba as accompaniment, then all pretence at explanation is superseded by a dropped-jaw question: what the hell's that all about?
Without wishing to seem as though I am pursuing an erotic theme, much of it has to do with oral tradition. Oral, as in spoken (aka sung), was the required medium for a language (Mallorquín) with little or no written tradition. As most of the rural population wouldn't have been proud owners of a pen or other such writing implement, let alone know how to use it, such absence of written tradition was hardly a great surprise. And the same can be said of the reading tradition. Into this communicative vacuum, therefore, came the glosador some time around (at least) the nineteenth century. There were professional glosadors. They would hold contests. They still do. In addition to entertainment, they were engaged in the dissemination of information.
A root of the glosador - possibly - is the troubadour, the wandering minstrel of southern France and northern Spain who, in his original guise, dabbled in lyrics in the "langue d'oc". This tongue is important. It was and is otherwise known as Occitan, closed aligned to Catalan linguistically. The troubadour phenomenon arose in the twelfth century. His popularity was such that one would presume that he wasn't so far behind the invasion ships that arrived off Mallorca in the following century. Is it fanciful to suggest that over time the troubadour in his Mallorcan guise was to morph into the glosador? The meanings are not dissimilar. Troubadour comes from "trobar" - to compose; glosador from "glosar" - to provide a commentary.
Whatever the origins of the glosador there is no doubting the tradition and the obvious linguistic significance. The glosador is thus representative of something distinctly Mallorcan (and Balearic), which may help to explain why a glosador (more than one in fact) is aspiring to become a deputy in Congress on behalf of a newly formed party that goes by the name of Sobirania per a les Illes (sovereignty over the islands).
Mateu Matas, "Xuri", is one of Mallorca's best known glosadors. He is the lead candidate for what he has described as not being a political party. Rather like defining a glosador, it is difficult to therefore know how to define Sobirania if it claims not to be a party. There again, the same used to apply to Podemos.
And it is Podemos who seem to be the principal reason for the emergence of Sobirania. This stems from the decision of Més to ally itself with Podemos, characterised by Sobirania as a Madrid-based party and so, by implication, not a defender of nationalist, island rights. The like-minded in Sobirania have been left to feel like "orphans", deprived of a potential political say because Més, supposedly the voice of nationalism and sovereignty, have got into bed with Podemos.
Sobirania, let's call them Sobs shall we, is a peculiar alliance of one-time right-wingers, hard-left radicals, the odd screwball and glosadors. In the shadows, so it is being said, is one-time and briefly PP president of the Balearics, Cristòfol Soler, who long ago nailed his colours to the Balearic sovereignty movement (i.e. independence). There is also our old friend Jaume Sastre, the hunger-striking teacher, a man with a permanent look of utter misery combined with sheer anger: he's very much an independentist. We also have someone called Loreto Amorós, who is possibly worthy of an entire article. If not, let's just note that she has told her Twitter fans, of whom there are apparently thousands, that she does "topless". Good for her.
Do the Sobs have any chance of gaining a seat in Congress? Absolutely none. Xuri says that in addition to not actually being a party, the Sobs aren't looking to take votes from others. And he may be right, if no one votes for them. But one has to admire his optimism and his defence of islands' rights. You don't get much more Mallorcan (Balearic) than a glosador, and he says that "we are here to sing". So there you have it. It is singing after all.
Without wishing to seem as though I am pursuing an erotic theme, much of it has to do with oral tradition. Oral, as in spoken (aka sung), was the required medium for a language (Mallorquín) with little or no written tradition. As most of the rural population wouldn't have been proud owners of a pen or other such writing implement, let alone know how to use it, such absence of written tradition was hardly a great surprise. And the same can be said of the reading tradition. Into this communicative vacuum, therefore, came the glosador some time around (at least) the nineteenth century. There were professional glosadors. They would hold contests. They still do. In addition to entertainment, they were engaged in the dissemination of information.
A root of the glosador - possibly - is the troubadour, the wandering minstrel of southern France and northern Spain who, in his original guise, dabbled in lyrics in the "langue d'oc". This tongue is important. It was and is otherwise known as Occitan, closed aligned to Catalan linguistically. The troubadour phenomenon arose in the twelfth century. His popularity was such that one would presume that he wasn't so far behind the invasion ships that arrived off Mallorca in the following century. Is it fanciful to suggest that over time the troubadour in his Mallorcan guise was to morph into the glosador? The meanings are not dissimilar. Troubadour comes from "trobar" - to compose; glosador from "glosar" - to provide a commentary.
Whatever the origins of the glosador there is no doubting the tradition and the obvious linguistic significance. The glosador is thus representative of something distinctly Mallorcan (and Balearic), which may help to explain why a glosador (more than one in fact) is aspiring to become a deputy in Congress on behalf of a newly formed party that goes by the name of Sobirania per a les Illes (sovereignty over the islands).
Mateu Matas, "Xuri", is one of Mallorca's best known glosadors. He is the lead candidate for what he has described as not being a political party. Rather like defining a glosador, it is difficult to therefore know how to define Sobirania if it claims not to be a party. There again, the same used to apply to Podemos.
And it is Podemos who seem to be the principal reason for the emergence of Sobirania. This stems from the decision of Més to ally itself with Podemos, characterised by Sobirania as a Madrid-based party and so, by implication, not a defender of nationalist, island rights. The like-minded in Sobirania have been left to feel like "orphans", deprived of a potential political say because Més, supposedly the voice of nationalism and sovereignty, have got into bed with Podemos.
Sobirania, let's call them Sobs shall we, is a peculiar alliance of one-time right-wingers, hard-left radicals, the odd screwball and glosadors. In the shadows, so it is being said, is one-time and briefly PP president of the Balearics, Cristòfol Soler, who long ago nailed his colours to the Balearic sovereignty movement (i.e. independence). There is also our old friend Jaume Sastre, the hunger-striking teacher, a man with a permanent look of utter misery combined with sheer anger: he's very much an independentist. We also have someone called Loreto Amorós, who is possibly worthy of an entire article. If not, let's just note that she has told her Twitter fans, of whom there are apparently thousands, that she does "topless". Good for her.
Do the Sobs have any chance of gaining a seat in Congress? Absolutely none. Xuri says that in addition to not actually being a party, the Sobs aren't looking to take votes from others. And he may be right, if no one votes for them. But one has to admire his optimism and his defence of islands' rights. You don't get much more Mallorcan (Balearic) than a glosador, and he says that "we are here to sing". So there you have it. It is singing after all.
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Are Podemos Getting Desperate?
David Abril, effectively the new leader of Més, speaks of an "humiliating agreement" if his party is eased into fourth place on the Congress list of deputies for the June general election as part of a pact with Podemos. The first three places would be for Podemos. In alliance with Més and the United Left, the total number of votes - based on the December election - would guarantee a third deputy to add to the two which Podemos secured before Christmas. But Més would find themselves without the deputy they covet so much and which would confirm their Madrid arrival as flag wavers for Mallorcan nationalism.
Alberto Jarabo, the Podemos leader in the Balearics, says that Més wouldn't have a presence in Madrid (in Congress) without an alliance with Podemos. He is absolutely right. Even if Més didn't have an actual deputy, they would have some presence thanks to an alliance. Or would they? Likewise, Podemos would be very hard pushed to gain sufficient support on its own (or with the United Left as even more junior partners) to obtain a third deputy. They need Més as much as Més need Podemos. But Més, unless things change, will not get their deputy. They might swallow the second prize of a senator but that would still represent a blow to their ambitions.
For Podemos, the end game (or the start of the beginning game) has always been about national government and so seats in Congress and the Senate if not in the Moncloa Palace of the presidency. They were less concerned about the regional elections, albeit they offered a good barometer of how things might go at the general election. Podemos would have been confident, and their confidence was not misplaced. They now have a second bite of the cherry. One might conclude that the fruitless negotiations with PSOE were all geared to having this second stab. But has there been a miscalculation?
The negotiations with Més can be viewed in different ways. One is that they have been about creating a firm pact of the hard left with the objective of ousting the Partido Popular (still far from being a foregone conclusion). The other is that they were designed to give Podemos what they crave - power. Més, without an actual deputy, would have been used as a means to an end: one belonging to Podemos.
For Abril to have referred to a humiliation has distinct echoes of how PSOE have suffered in this new era of Balearic and Spanish politics. They have been humiliated, forced into agreements and policies that one very much doubts they would have adopted had they been left to their own devices. Yes, there is supposedly a spirit of "dialogue and consensus", but there seems precious little sign of it being truly two-way (or three-way in the Balearics). Podemos. Power. And power that has seen PSOE trampled over. Més must surely have considered that their fate was being decided in a similar fashion.
Alberto Jarabo and Laura Camargo of Podemos have both referred to the "negative image" that the apparent failure of Podemos and Més to come to an accord conveys. Negative to whom? To the electorate? Possibly so, but while this will be styled as a failure to provide the "citizens" with what they supposedly have voted for - the government of change, to use the constant mantra - it can also be viewed as a negative reflection of Podemos. Their leaders in the Balearics continuously hector others. In the process they come across as unlikable. Més may have their wilder elements but they also have individuals that many, regardless of political persuasion, have a liking for: Biel Barceló, Miquel Ensenyat, Fina Santiago. Not everyone will feel this. Of course they won't. But Més (and PSOE) have a likability that Podemos do not.
At national level Podemos have a similar likability issue. Pablo Iglesias is the exception. He is likable, highly admirable in many ways. But he made a mistake with his attack on the media and the suggestion that the media should be state-controlled. He apologised, but did that set the alarm bells off? What truly lies behind his likability? Podemos, the polls suggest, have slipped. An alliance for the election has thus been formed with the United Left. Together they would, on the basis of the December election, get more votes than PSOE. The United Left might end up with eight deputies as opposed to the current two. That would represent a result for them, but for Podemos there is a feeling that it is an alliance of necessity. The United Left's Alberto Garzón gets good approval ratings; better than Iglesias. There's a likability factor.
But is it a sign of desperation by Podemos? If the polls are right and their support is leaking, they need to plug the hole.
Alberto Jarabo, the Podemos leader in the Balearics, says that Més wouldn't have a presence in Madrid (in Congress) without an alliance with Podemos. He is absolutely right. Even if Més didn't have an actual deputy, they would have some presence thanks to an alliance. Or would they? Likewise, Podemos would be very hard pushed to gain sufficient support on its own (or with the United Left as even more junior partners) to obtain a third deputy. They need Més as much as Més need Podemos. But Més, unless things change, will not get their deputy. They might swallow the second prize of a senator but that would still represent a blow to their ambitions.
For Podemos, the end game (or the start of the beginning game) has always been about national government and so seats in Congress and the Senate if not in the Moncloa Palace of the presidency. They were less concerned about the regional elections, albeit they offered a good barometer of how things might go at the general election. Podemos would have been confident, and their confidence was not misplaced. They now have a second bite of the cherry. One might conclude that the fruitless negotiations with PSOE were all geared to having this second stab. But has there been a miscalculation?
The negotiations with Més can be viewed in different ways. One is that they have been about creating a firm pact of the hard left with the objective of ousting the Partido Popular (still far from being a foregone conclusion). The other is that they were designed to give Podemos what they crave - power. Més, without an actual deputy, would have been used as a means to an end: one belonging to Podemos.
For Abril to have referred to a humiliation has distinct echoes of how PSOE have suffered in this new era of Balearic and Spanish politics. They have been humiliated, forced into agreements and policies that one very much doubts they would have adopted had they been left to their own devices. Yes, there is supposedly a spirit of "dialogue and consensus", but there seems precious little sign of it being truly two-way (or three-way in the Balearics). Podemos. Power. And power that has seen PSOE trampled over. Més must surely have considered that their fate was being decided in a similar fashion.
Alberto Jarabo and Laura Camargo of Podemos have both referred to the "negative image" that the apparent failure of Podemos and Més to come to an accord conveys. Negative to whom? To the electorate? Possibly so, but while this will be styled as a failure to provide the "citizens" with what they supposedly have voted for - the government of change, to use the constant mantra - it can also be viewed as a negative reflection of Podemos. Their leaders in the Balearics continuously hector others. In the process they come across as unlikable. Més may have their wilder elements but they also have individuals that many, regardless of political persuasion, have a liking for: Biel Barceló, Miquel Ensenyat, Fina Santiago. Not everyone will feel this. Of course they won't. But Més (and PSOE) have a likability that Podemos do not.
At national level Podemos have a similar likability issue. Pablo Iglesias is the exception. He is likable, highly admirable in many ways. But he made a mistake with his attack on the media and the suggestion that the media should be state-controlled. He apologised, but did that set the alarm bells off? What truly lies behind his likability? Podemos, the polls suggest, have slipped. An alliance for the election has thus been formed with the United Left. Together they would, on the basis of the December election, get more votes than PSOE. The United Left might end up with eight deputies as opposed to the current two. That would represent a result for them, but for Podemos there is a feeling that it is an alliance of necessity. The United Left's Alberto Garzón gets good approval ratings; better than Iglesias. There's a likability factor.
But is it a sign of desperation by Podemos? If the polls are right and their support is leaking, they need to plug the hole.
Monday, May 09, 2016
The Colour Purple: Podemos
"All good socialist citizens of the Balearics, I call on you to lay down your red flags and follow the colour purple." These weren't the exact words of Alberto Jarabo but they catch the essence of Alberto's desire for the Purple Rain of Podemos to persist all over the Partido Popular and PSOE: a purple shower, one might say. "You say you want a leader, but you can't seem to make up your mind, I think you better close it, and let me guide you to the purple rain." These were Prince's words, and now the prince of Balearic Podemosism has recognised the doubts in voters' minds and so has sought to make their minds up for them: vote for the party with the purple colour, Vota Podemos!, Vota Iglesias! If you are a socialist, that is. Oh, and if you actually have a vote.
Neither PSOE in the Balearics nor PSOE nationally can overcome the Partido Popular and lead a government of change, our own Dave Spart droned on. These were his actual words: "We invite the socialists of the islands to vote for Podemos." Yes, all invited to the party - Podemos not PSOE. Whatever must Francina have been thinking? One of her partners in Balearic government of change had made it clear that PSOE cannot lead a government of change. Oh dear.
Somewhere in Francina's sweet and friendly land La Presidenta was waffling on about the stability of her government (of change or otherwise) and consensus, dialogue, blah, blah, but her left-hand woman, the newly installed minister for the presidency, Pilar Costa, had been having none of any possible Spartist socialist vote-grab. Ms. Coast, also now the chief government spokesperson, has in the past shown that her speaking can cause a slight issue, such as when she referred to José Maria Rodríguez, the boss of the PP in Palma as ... er, as the boss. But she specifically used the word "capo", as in mafia boss. José Maria was from impressed, and so off they went to a conciliation tribunal, a bit like a court for consensus and dialogue.
Anyway, Ms. Coast had, prior to the Jarabo purple revolution declaration, suggested that it would be a "serious mistake" were there to be an alliance between Podemos and the Més-ites which would have as its greater priority a defeat of PSOE rather than the PP. Subsequent to Alberto's socialist call to arms, PSOE, including Ms. Coast, went quiet other than for another of Francina's left-hand women, election campaign organiser, Bel Oliver, to assert that the "citizens" have a further opportunity (on 26 June) to put an end to the PP government. Yes, they do. By voting for Podemos.
Neither PSOE in the Balearics nor PSOE nationally can overcome the Partido Popular and lead a government of change, our own Dave Spart droned on. These were his actual words: "We invite the socialists of the islands to vote for Podemos." Yes, all invited to the party - Podemos not PSOE. Whatever must Francina have been thinking? One of her partners in Balearic government of change had made it clear that PSOE cannot lead a government of change. Oh dear.
Somewhere in Francina's sweet and friendly land La Presidenta was waffling on about the stability of her government (of change or otherwise) and consensus, dialogue, blah, blah, but her left-hand woman, the newly installed minister for the presidency, Pilar Costa, had been having none of any possible Spartist socialist vote-grab. Ms. Coast, also now the chief government spokesperson, has in the past shown that her speaking can cause a slight issue, such as when she referred to José Maria Rodríguez, the boss of the PP in Palma as ... er, as the boss. But she specifically used the word "capo", as in mafia boss. José Maria was from impressed, and so off they went to a conciliation tribunal, a bit like a court for consensus and dialogue.
Anyway, Ms. Coast had, prior to the Jarabo purple revolution declaration, suggested that it would be a "serious mistake" were there to be an alliance between Podemos and the Més-ites which would have as its greater priority a defeat of PSOE rather than the PP. Subsequent to Alberto's socialist call to arms, PSOE, including Ms. Coast, went quiet other than for another of Francina's left-hand women, election campaign organiser, Bel Oliver, to assert that the "citizens" have a further opportunity (on 26 June) to put an end to the PP government. Yes, they do. By voting for Podemos.
Wednesday, May 04, 2016
Dead Woman President Walking
When the next election comes round on 26 June, the Balearics will provide its own little sideshow. The region contributes eight deputies to the national Congress - 2.3% of its 350 total. This might seem unimportant but 26-J could prove to be very important for the Balearics.
At the pre-Christmas election, the Partido Popular, with the highest share of the regional vote, secured three seats. There were two each for Podemos and PSOE and one for Ciudadanos (C's). Excluded from Congress, therefore, was Més. It polled worse than the party had hoped, though its 7% share of the vote put it in the mix for potentially gaining a seat: parties have to secure a minimum of 3% in order to be considered under the proportional representation system.
Més is this time more confident of getting itself into Congress, though a pact with the United Left and Pacma (the party against animal mistreatment) would, on the basis of the December vote, still leave it short. What would change its fortunes would be an alliance with Podemos, and the chances of there being an alliance of what one might describe as the hard left in the Balearics are strong.
Were there to be this alliance, it would - again using December's vote - be the main force in the Balearics, polling higher than the PP with 33% of the share of the vote. With the PP staying more or less where it was in December (it surely won't lose votes), PSOE would be relegated to one Congress seat. If things went really badly for PSOE and exceptionally well for the hard left pact and for the C's, PSOE could find itself with no seat (an unlikely outcome though).
The alliance with Podemos is not yet a done deal. Podemos will insist that it has the first two names on the "list", i.e. its two current deputies. Having gained 23% of the share of the December vote, it holds the aces in negotiations with Més. But granting Més the third name on the list would have some appeal because of the way in which the hard-left alliance would become the number one force.
Why should this really matter? It would matter a great deal to the government of the Balearics. Here would be a situation in which two partners in government (one actually in it, Més, and one not, Podemos) gang up against the leadership of that government - PSOE. If for no other reason than psychological, it would be a blow to Francina Armengol and to her party.
But it could prove to be more than just psychological. Podemos has remained outside the government. It might decide that, emboldened by a June performance, it would seek entrance. Though the regional government was determined by the regional and not the general election and though PSOE got the greater share of the vote and the greater number of regional parliament seats, Podemos and Més together have a higher parliamentary representation. Armengol isn't forecasting any threat to the "stability" of her government, but she would be weakened if the Més-Podemos general election alliance were to be realised.
The fact is that she was already weak. In the run-up to the regional election last May, she and PSOE shifted more to the left. It was clear which way the wind was blowing, and it was steering a leftward course. It didn't do PSOE much good. It was sufficient to enter government but into a government with its hands tied. Armengol isn't a puppet as such, but she is no puppet master. Podemos is perpetually hovering, threatening to hang her out to dry. After 26-J, she will hang on to the presidency, but her credibility will be less than it already is: a sort of dead woman president walking, constantly bleating the lines about consensus and dialogue, when in truth the dialogue is all one way.
So rattled is PSOE that its number one on the December list, Ramon Socias, is to be ousted. What difference his removal will make is hard to fathom, though his position as number one in December was also difficult to comprehend. A former national government delegate to the Balearics, he has some substance, but he's in the "veteran" category, tarnished by old failings and something of a non-entity when pitched against the likes of the PP's number one, Mateo Isern, or the judge, Juan Pedro Yllanes, the Podemos number one. Changing him for another non-entity doesn't make much sense. PSOE is up against it whoever it has on its list.
Though further weakened, Armengol should survive. Despite PSOE's weakness, it does have some strength. If Més and Podemos have in mind an alternative president (one from its combined ranks), PSOE would surely block it. But why would they? They'll just tell PSOE what to do, and the president will agree. There's consensus and dialogue for you.
At the pre-Christmas election, the Partido Popular, with the highest share of the regional vote, secured three seats. There were two each for Podemos and PSOE and one for Ciudadanos (C's). Excluded from Congress, therefore, was Més. It polled worse than the party had hoped, though its 7% share of the vote put it in the mix for potentially gaining a seat: parties have to secure a minimum of 3% in order to be considered under the proportional representation system.
Més is this time more confident of getting itself into Congress, though a pact with the United Left and Pacma (the party against animal mistreatment) would, on the basis of the December vote, still leave it short. What would change its fortunes would be an alliance with Podemos, and the chances of there being an alliance of what one might describe as the hard left in the Balearics are strong.
Were there to be this alliance, it would - again using December's vote - be the main force in the Balearics, polling higher than the PP with 33% of the share of the vote. With the PP staying more or less where it was in December (it surely won't lose votes), PSOE would be relegated to one Congress seat. If things went really badly for PSOE and exceptionally well for the hard left pact and for the C's, PSOE could find itself with no seat (an unlikely outcome though).
The alliance with Podemos is not yet a done deal. Podemos will insist that it has the first two names on the "list", i.e. its two current deputies. Having gained 23% of the share of the December vote, it holds the aces in negotiations with Més. But granting Més the third name on the list would have some appeal because of the way in which the hard-left alliance would become the number one force.
Why should this really matter? It would matter a great deal to the government of the Balearics. Here would be a situation in which two partners in government (one actually in it, Més, and one not, Podemos) gang up against the leadership of that government - PSOE. If for no other reason than psychological, it would be a blow to Francina Armengol and to her party.
But it could prove to be more than just psychological. Podemos has remained outside the government. It might decide that, emboldened by a June performance, it would seek entrance. Though the regional government was determined by the regional and not the general election and though PSOE got the greater share of the vote and the greater number of regional parliament seats, Podemos and Més together have a higher parliamentary representation. Armengol isn't forecasting any threat to the "stability" of her government, but she would be weakened if the Més-Podemos general election alliance were to be realised.
The fact is that she was already weak. In the run-up to the regional election last May, she and PSOE shifted more to the left. It was clear which way the wind was blowing, and it was steering a leftward course. It didn't do PSOE much good. It was sufficient to enter government but into a government with its hands tied. Armengol isn't a puppet as such, but she is no puppet master. Podemos is perpetually hovering, threatening to hang her out to dry. After 26-J, she will hang on to the presidency, but her credibility will be less than it already is: a sort of dead woman president walking, constantly bleating the lines about consensus and dialogue, when in truth the dialogue is all one way.
So rattled is PSOE that its number one on the December list, Ramon Socias, is to be ousted. What difference his removal will make is hard to fathom, though his position as number one in December was also difficult to comprehend. A former national government delegate to the Balearics, he has some substance, but he's in the "veteran" category, tarnished by old failings and something of a non-entity when pitched against the likes of the PP's number one, Mateo Isern, or the judge, Juan Pedro Yllanes, the Podemos number one. Changing him for another non-entity doesn't make much sense. PSOE is up against it whoever it has on its list.
Though further weakened, Armengol should survive. Despite PSOE's weakness, it does have some strength. If Més and Podemos have in mind an alternative president (one from its combined ranks), PSOE would surely block it. But why would they? They'll just tell PSOE what to do, and the president will agree. There's consensus and dialogue for you.
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Getting A Headache: Covering the election
It was almost wistful. But not that much. Passing the school where in May I had cast my vote in the municipal election, I pined, only momentarily, to be allowed to re-enter. As one of the great disenfranchised diaspora I could not. National elections are for nationals. I'm still minded to believe that this is actually how it should be, but one misses the thrills, such as they are, of the Spanish voting system and the confusion for those attending the "tables" when presented with a foreigner who has two Christian names and one surname. Several moments of amusement ensue.
The attendees of these tables are not volunteers. Long before the current days of citizens participating left, right and centre (though mainly left), they decided to make it like jury service. If you're unlucky enough to have your name picked out, then you have to go and do your citizen's duty. I'm unsure if this means if I, or many of those of you reading this, might one day suffer the same fate. Given that the vote is denied, it seems a tad preposterous to demand table attendance. A mate of mine in Barcelona has had to. I must ask him if this was for the general or other elections. Either way, he can only vote for Ada Colau (or not) and not for Artur Mas, so he was doing his duty for something which he can only partially participate in. There must surely be a message here somewhere for the participative new age, or are foreigners classed as citizens or not?
It would make life an awful lot simpler if everywhere in Spain was like Villarroya in La Rioja. There, they don't have to drag everything out for eleven hours before getting down to the results. As there are only six voters out of nine inhabitants of this municipality (one of whom must be the Partido Popular mayor), the polling station was opened and closed within a minute. How many citizens had been called on to attend the tables, one wonders. Presumably, the voters and the table attendants were one and the same.
This was one of the little anecdotes that made a long day vaguely bearable, another one having been the three voters who turned up early doors in Ibiza only to find that there were no table attendants, so they made themselves into attendants, which was very decent of them. True citizen spirit. And participative, to boot.
Spanish election day starts with a bang as the media troops around getting snaps of principal candidates and other political prominenti smiling and casting their votes. Or in the case of Barcelona's mayor Ada Colau not casting her vote, as she had forgotten her ID. Might the police have a word with her? Is it not obligatory to carry this at all times? There were also the traditional photos of nuns voting. Does the church issue its recommendations? Mariano it might be expected to be, but when there's a chap whose name translates as Churches, he must have been good for a few votes among the religious community.
The greatest media scrum was for Mr. Churches, Pablo Iglesias. He was positively beaming, having tweeted earlier that he hoped citizens had risen with a smile and were off to perform their duty for change. There was to be proof that they had, the Podemos Twitter account replete with the happy, smiling faces of those both old and young. The new age was here, and it was all over Twitter. Pablo had gone to the polling station with his chum Íñigo Errejón, a Podemos co-founder, who doesn't look old enough to vote. By about six years. He is actually 32, so fifteen years older than the boy in Badajoz who had turned up wanting to vote and was politely told that he would have to wait nine days until he was 18.
Once this early election euphoria died down, the day dragged on, lightened only by announcements as to turnout. Eventually, this was to be up. Which was reassuring for the advocates of citizen participation. When the end finally came, exit polls were saying what was to be confirmed. It was Podemos who had been the real winners in the head-to-head between the new boys and girls. The opinion polls had got that part wrong.
All that remained was for the leaders' rallying speeches, arranged in pecking order so that they didn't clash. Mariano had to wait till last, as befits the possibly outgoing premier. Not that Mariano's going anywhere. He plans on forming the next government, despite being deprived of a third of his Congress colleagues.
Having been chained to a computer for the whole day and some of the night, it all ended with a massive headache and neck ache. For Spain, the headache now begins. Not one of a hangover. One of who on earth can now govern.
The attendees of these tables are not volunteers. Long before the current days of citizens participating left, right and centre (though mainly left), they decided to make it like jury service. If you're unlucky enough to have your name picked out, then you have to go and do your citizen's duty. I'm unsure if this means if I, or many of those of you reading this, might one day suffer the same fate. Given that the vote is denied, it seems a tad preposterous to demand table attendance. A mate of mine in Barcelona has had to. I must ask him if this was for the general or other elections. Either way, he can only vote for Ada Colau (or not) and not for Artur Mas, so he was doing his duty for something which he can only partially participate in. There must surely be a message here somewhere for the participative new age, or are foreigners classed as citizens or not?
It would make life an awful lot simpler if everywhere in Spain was like Villarroya in La Rioja. There, they don't have to drag everything out for eleven hours before getting down to the results. As there are only six voters out of nine inhabitants of this municipality (one of whom must be the Partido Popular mayor), the polling station was opened and closed within a minute. How many citizens had been called on to attend the tables, one wonders. Presumably, the voters and the table attendants were one and the same.
This was one of the little anecdotes that made a long day vaguely bearable, another one having been the three voters who turned up early doors in Ibiza only to find that there were no table attendants, so they made themselves into attendants, which was very decent of them. True citizen spirit. And participative, to boot.
Spanish election day starts with a bang as the media troops around getting snaps of principal candidates and other political prominenti smiling and casting their votes. Or in the case of Barcelona's mayor Ada Colau not casting her vote, as she had forgotten her ID. Might the police have a word with her? Is it not obligatory to carry this at all times? There were also the traditional photos of nuns voting. Does the church issue its recommendations? Mariano it might be expected to be, but when there's a chap whose name translates as Churches, he must have been good for a few votes among the religious community.
The greatest media scrum was for Mr. Churches, Pablo Iglesias. He was positively beaming, having tweeted earlier that he hoped citizens had risen with a smile and were off to perform their duty for change. There was to be proof that they had, the Podemos Twitter account replete with the happy, smiling faces of those both old and young. The new age was here, and it was all over Twitter. Pablo had gone to the polling station with his chum Íñigo Errejón, a Podemos co-founder, who doesn't look old enough to vote. By about six years. He is actually 32, so fifteen years older than the boy in Badajoz who had turned up wanting to vote and was politely told that he would have to wait nine days until he was 18.
Once this early election euphoria died down, the day dragged on, lightened only by announcements as to turnout. Eventually, this was to be up. Which was reassuring for the advocates of citizen participation. When the end finally came, exit polls were saying what was to be confirmed. It was Podemos who had been the real winners in the head-to-head between the new boys and girls. The opinion polls had got that part wrong.
All that remained was for the leaders' rallying speeches, arranged in pecking order so that they didn't clash. Mariano had to wait till last, as befits the possibly outgoing premier. Not that Mariano's going anywhere. He plans on forming the next government, despite being deprived of a third of his Congress colleagues.
Having been chained to a computer for the whole day and some of the night, it all ended with a massive headache and neck ache. For Spain, the headache now begins. Not one of a hangover. One of who on earth can now govern.
Sunday, December 20, 2015
Mazza's Prezza Moment
Well, it wasn't exactly a John Prescott moment. Prezza had, after all, been the one who delivered the left hook, having been the ungrateful recipient of an egg. It was Mazza who was on the end of the left hook, one delivered with rather greater force than Prezza had planted on Eggy's chin, and it went not on his chin but on the side of his face.
The idiot who did this, a seventeen-year-old youth by the name of Andrés, is apparently related to the PM. Son of a cousin of his wife. Or something like that. Quite what this means - in relative terms - I have no interest in trying to figure out. But maybe the youth was having a go for not having received Christmas presents in the past. Whatever his motives, he was said to have been pleased with himself. A judge has sent the spotty Herbert to a youth detention centre. No Christmas for him then. Stupid, more stupid, most stupid.
The great question that was raised by the left hook was what had happened to the prime ministerial spectacles. Rajoy continued his walkabout in glassless disorientation. "Where am I going?" "Who are you?" It was to be a day later before the prime ministerial Twitter advisors delivered a message that the PM had been planning on sending a letter to the Three Kings and ask them for some new specs. But this was not going to be necessary. The spectacles had been found. Hurrah!
Reunited with the eye furniture, Mazza was able to inform a radio interviewer that he would not be wearing glasses the next time someone decides to land one on him. With this, everyone was mightily relieved, while the Twitterati at Rajoy HQ had landed something of a coup in managing to turn the whole thing into a joke. The spotty Herbert in question had also managed something previously almost unimaginable: making people feel sorry for Rajoy. If there's one thing you don't do, it is punch a defenceless man who, whatever you might think of him, looks as though he's the last person in Spain who would either retaliate or initiate a punch-up. His poll rating almost certainly increased.
While Mariano had studiously avoided using the C-word when confronted by the boy Sánchez of PSOE during their televised head-to-head insultathon, it was given more than ample airing here in Mallorca. The six leaders of parties hoping to get themselves a nice number in Madrid today were televisually paraded midweek, their debate - such as it was - notable for Here Come Da Judge (Podemos) using distinctly unjudgelike and intemperate language. "Rotten to the core," he bellowed on three occasions in Matty Isern's general direction. It was the PP that was rotten, he was reminding the viewers, most of whom have been able to figure that out for themselves.
Reassuringly, however, and amidst the jibes of "demagoguery" directed at Da Judge by the bloke from the C's whose name no one remembers or "structural corruption", which was levelled by The Verger (Més) at any party other than his own, there was The Font, whose vast, great and wise knowledge has previously made him and his party - The Pine (El Pi) - appear to rise above the puerile name-calling. The Font informed everyone that it costs 15.45 euros to send ten kilos of sobrassada to Madrid and nine euros for the same amount of sausagey stuff to go to Barcelona. His point being? Don't send your sobrassada to Madrid. Which will come as a bit of a blow to him if he wins a seat in Congress. Which he probably won't.
The idiot who did this, a seventeen-year-old youth by the name of Andrés, is apparently related to the PM. Son of a cousin of his wife. Or something like that. Quite what this means - in relative terms - I have no interest in trying to figure out. But maybe the youth was having a go for not having received Christmas presents in the past. Whatever his motives, he was said to have been pleased with himself. A judge has sent the spotty Herbert to a youth detention centre. No Christmas for him then. Stupid, more stupid, most stupid.
The great question that was raised by the left hook was what had happened to the prime ministerial spectacles. Rajoy continued his walkabout in glassless disorientation. "Where am I going?" "Who are you?" It was to be a day later before the prime ministerial Twitter advisors delivered a message that the PM had been planning on sending a letter to the Three Kings and ask them for some new specs. But this was not going to be necessary. The spectacles had been found. Hurrah!
Reunited with the eye furniture, Mazza was able to inform a radio interviewer that he would not be wearing glasses the next time someone decides to land one on him. With this, everyone was mightily relieved, while the Twitterati at Rajoy HQ had landed something of a coup in managing to turn the whole thing into a joke. The spotty Herbert in question had also managed something previously almost unimaginable: making people feel sorry for Rajoy. If there's one thing you don't do, it is punch a defenceless man who, whatever you might think of him, looks as though he's the last person in Spain who would either retaliate or initiate a punch-up. His poll rating almost certainly increased.
While Mariano had studiously avoided using the C-word when confronted by the boy Sánchez of PSOE during their televised head-to-head insultathon, it was given more than ample airing here in Mallorca. The six leaders of parties hoping to get themselves a nice number in Madrid today were televisually paraded midweek, their debate - such as it was - notable for Here Come Da Judge (Podemos) using distinctly unjudgelike and intemperate language. "Rotten to the core," he bellowed on three occasions in Matty Isern's general direction. It was the PP that was rotten, he was reminding the viewers, most of whom have been able to figure that out for themselves.
Reassuringly, however, and amidst the jibes of "demagoguery" directed at Da Judge by the bloke from the C's whose name no one remembers or "structural corruption", which was levelled by The Verger (Més) at any party other than his own, there was The Font, whose vast, great and wise knowledge has previously made him and his party - The Pine (El Pi) - appear to rise above the puerile name-calling. The Font informed everyone that it costs 15.45 euros to send ten kilos of sobrassada to Madrid and nine euros for the same amount of sausagey stuff to go to Barcelona. His point being? Don't send your sobrassada to Madrid. Which will come as a bit of a blow to him if he wins a seat in Congress. Which he probably won't.
Friday, December 18, 2015
The Four-Way Fight: Partido Popular
The saying "be careful what you wish for" applies well to Mariano Rajoy. Twice over. Be careful of what you might wish for as an alternative. Be careful of what you might wish for in having to put up with him for another four years. When PSOE's Pedro Sánchez branded him "miserable" on Monday night's televised debate, he could have been referring to Mariano the image as opposed to Mariano the incapable of tackling corruption.
There's another saying: "better the devil you know". There may be devilishness lurking within the PP that is still to be rooted out of its darker corners and exposed to the lights of the media as it troops into the anti-corruption judges' chambers. There may be devilishness in the viciousness of austerity, in the spitefulness of gagging freedom of expression, in the zeal of advancing the force of religion against the devil of greater social liberalism and secularism. There may be devilishness in all this. But who might the other devil be? Is it one in disguise or is it one already held up before the electorate with two horns on a populist head?
Let's be clear. When Rajoy won in 2011 he inherited a total mess. Because the PP wasn't a Podemos or Syriza, there was never going to be any challenging of the commands from outside. Economic and financial recovery were on others' terms. The government accepted this and in the process managed to avoid complete humiliation. Bit by bit, the economy was put back together again, as was the banking system. In that Monday night debate, Rajoy reminded Sánchez that Spain had been Europe's sick man in 2011. In fact, it was just one in intensive care, but the drip to the vein over four years has produced a recovery in rather ruder health than others. All things being relative.
One of the arguments of opponents is that recovery has yet to be felt within the real economy. Up to a point this is the case. Yet, indicators have started to suggest that it is being felt. As an example, business and consumer confidence does appear to have increased. The government can also point to improved employment statistics, but opponents rightly draw attention to the seasonal effect on jobs. This is no more the case than in the Balearics. The fact is, however, that seasonality is inherent to the Spanish economy; not all of it, but to a good part of it.
Any government in Spain faces the same problem. This is a country with great differences and imbalance economically. In the southern regions of Andalusia and Extremadura (Murcia as well), there has never been what might be described as true industrialisation. Andalusia, trapped in the seasonality of tourism and of agriculture, has massive unemployment. The magnificence of Seville, Malaga and Granada cannot obscure its weaknesses, which were made far greater when construction collapsed during crisis.
This regional variation, though, goes to the heart of one of Rajoy's biggest failures. Catalonia. The government had every right to seek to prevent secession, but the independence drive was given an enormous boost by Rajoy's total rejection of improved financial terms for Catalonia; indeed, it was what made Artur Mas take the independence plunge. Rajoy is stubborn and he is also unsympathetic. By demeanour he is and also by instinct. A more sympathetic prime minister might have sought to plead with Mas (and to the country as a whole) to join in a project for national regeneration with the promise of a thorough review of not just Catalonia's relationship with the state but all the regions. Pedro Sánchez has made a pledge to move towards federalism, but whatever the arrangement is or might become, Rajoy chose not to make such an appeal to an equally obstinate opponent in Mas or to present himself to the public as a figurehead for renewal. The regional issue will continue to dog whatever government is in power, but it is one that badly needs addressing. Whether the PP is the party to do this is another matter. And whether Rajoy is still around will be another.
It is clear that the PP is going to suffer a calamitous loss of support on Sunday, but it doesn't have to be terminal. But as with terms set out by Europe for recovery, the PP may have to bow to the terms of others, with the C's the most obvious ones to make them. If a pact with the C's is not possible, if the other parties can't find a way of forging a coalition, then the PP may try to govern in minority. But there would be a massive if, along with what would be a very significant minority. Would Congress approve the investiture of Rajoy?
One way or another, he may be left with no choice but to fall on his sword.
There's another saying: "better the devil you know". There may be devilishness lurking within the PP that is still to be rooted out of its darker corners and exposed to the lights of the media as it troops into the anti-corruption judges' chambers. There may be devilishness in the viciousness of austerity, in the spitefulness of gagging freedom of expression, in the zeal of advancing the force of religion against the devil of greater social liberalism and secularism. There may be devilishness in all this. But who might the other devil be? Is it one in disguise or is it one already held up before the electorate with two horns on a populist head?
Let's be clear. When Rajoy won in 2011 he inherited a total mess. Because the PP wasn't a Podemos or Syriza, there was never going to be any challenging of the commands from outside. Economic and financial recovery were on others' terms. The government accepted this and in the process managed to avoid complete humiliation. Bit by bit, the economy was put back together again, as was the banking system. In that Monday night debate, Rajoy reminded Sánchez that Spain had been Europe's sick man in 2011. In fact, it was just one in intensive care, but the drip to the vein over four years has produced a recovery in rather ruder health than others. All things being relative.
One of the arguments of opponents is that recovery has yet to be felt within the real economy. Up to a point this is the case. Yet, indicators have started to suggest that it is being felt. As an example, business and consumer confidence does appear to have increased. The government can also point to improved employment statistics, but opponents rightly draw attention to the seasonal effect on jobs. This is no more the case than in the Balearics. The fact is, however, that seasonality is inherent to the Spanish economy; not all of it, but to a good part of it.
Any government in Spain faces the same problem. This is a country with great differences and imbalance economically. In the southern regions of Andalusia and Extremadura (Murcia as well), there has never been what might be described as true industrialisation. Andalusia, trapped in the seasonality of tourism and of agriculture, has massive unemployment. The magnificence of Seville, Malaga and Granada cannot obscure its weaknesses, which were made far greater when construction collapsed during crisis.
This regional variation, though, goes to the heart of one of Rajoy's biggest failures. Catalonia. The government had every right to seek to prevent secession, but the independence drive was given an enormous boost by Rajoy's total rejection of improved financial terms for Catalonia; indeed, it was what made Artur Mas take the independence plunge. Rajoy is stubborn and he is also unsympathetic. By demeanour he is and also by instinct. A more sympathetic prime minister might have sought to plead with Mas (and to the country as a whole) to join in a project for national regeneration with the promise of a thorough review of not just Catalonia's relationship with the state but all the regions. Pedro Sánchez has made a pledge to move towards federalism, but whatever the arrangement is or might become, Rajoy chose not to make such an appeal to an equally obstinate opponent in Mas or to present himself to the public as a figurehead for renewal. The regional issue will continue to dog whatever government is in power, but it is one that badly needs addressing. Whether the PP is the party to do this is another matter. And whether Rajoy is still around will be another.
It is clear that the PP is going to suffer a calamitous loss of support on Sunday, but it doesn't have to be terminal. But as with terms set out by Europe for recovery, the PP may have to bow to the terms of others, with the C's the most obvious ones to make them. If a pact with the C's is not possible, if the other parties can't find a way of forging a coalition, then the PP may try to govern in minority. But there would be a massive if, along with what would be a very significant minority. Would Congress approve the investiture of Rajoy?
One way or another, he may be left with no choice but to fall on his sword.
Saturday, December 05, 2015
The Podemos View Of Tourism
The general election campaign is creating a good deal of debate regarding tourism: debate and recrimination. Podemos have unleashed the one-man battering-ram who is co-founder Juan Carlos Monedero. In the Balearics this week, he described the islands' tourism businesses as "predators" who think only about financial benefits. He was, one suspects, mainly aiming his ire in the direction of hoteliers.
While Monedero has been in full rant mode, the Podemos tourism thinker, Eric Labuske, has been outlining the party's line on tourism. This is something that has been a long time coming, as the Podemos tourism strategy has until now been largely unknown. Labuske's vision includes a fifteen-year strategic plan that would incorporate "social, cultural and environmental values". It would be one to rectify the mistakes of the past forty years (he could have made that fifty or more), with an independent regulatory body to supervise state regulation of tourism sustainability and tax incentives for all sectors of the industry in order to achieve this. Whatever it actually is. There would also be public participation in organisations such as Turespaña (the national tourism promotion agency), with the whole plan aimed at breaking the "monoculture" of sun-and-beach tourism, which he sees as the "main culprit" in having caused seasonality, a lack of innovation and property speculation.
As a manifesto, it is a fine set of platitudes, albeit that a fifteen-year strategic plan and the involvement of different agents in the tourism sector (plus the public) does have some merit. But it is one which, not unnaturally, has drawn some criticism. One of the sources is the tourism consultant, Antonio Garzón. You wouldn't expect him to side with Podemos, and nor does he. For example, he challenges the whole argument about forty years of mistakes. Without those years (of tourism development), where would the welfare of a majority of Spaniards be? Labuske argues that the sun-and-beach model is "obsolete", a charge that Garzón firmly disputes. The need is for complementary models of tourism, not the dismantling of the primary one.
It is on the whole issue of sustainability where Garzón lets fly. On the sustainability concept, he calls it a "hackneyed tourism myth", saying that the tourism sector doesn't need anyone (such as Podemos or indeed Més in the Balearics) to come up with a plan for it, when environmental management is "highly developed" in most of Spain's tourism destinations. And on this, Garzón is right. One only, as an example, has to think of the checks and balances that have prevented the development of the hotel complex near Es Trenc beach.
The other new(ish) kids on the political block, Ciudadanos (C's), have had rather longer than Podemos to come up with their tourism policy. As a party they are almost ten years old now, and it might be suggested that it is this greater maturity which has pushed them well ahead of Podemos in the polls. The C's and the party leader, Albert Rivera, derive a great deal of support from the tourism sector: they are the polar opposite of Podemos in this regard.
One of their candidates for Congress, Francisco de la Torre, has been speaking this week about the C's programme for tourism, and fundamental to this would be the granting of hoteliers' wishes in cutting the tourist rate of IVA (VAT). It has been the failure of the Partido Popular to do this which, more than anything, has driven the tourism industry towards the C's. (The performance of Mallorca's Isabel Borrego as national secretary-of-state for tourism has been another.) Their plan is one for competitiveness.
The PP had promised prior to the last election that the tourist rate would go down to the super-reduced level of 4%. Instead, the Rajoy government put it up from 8% to 10%. The hoteliers were far from impressed. The C's are saying that there would be an intermediate reduction to 7%, with the aim of applying the super-reduced rate later. The party would also pursue a policy of language training and teaching, primarily with tourism in mind. Tourism professionals of the future, the C's say, must have a strong grasp on languages as a means of advancing tourism competitiveness. If they get into government, one can imagine some of the Balearic teaching brigade will prepare itself for another battle over language.
While Monedero has been in full rant mode, the Podemos tourism thinker, Eric Labuske, has been outlining the party's line on tourism. This is something that has been a long time coming, as the Podemos tourism strategy has until now been largely unknown. Labuske's vision includes a fifteen-year strategic plan that would incorporate "social, cultural and environmental values". It would be one to rectify the mistakes of the past forty years (he could have made that fifty or more), with an independent regulatory body to supervise state regulation of tourism sustainability and tax incentives for all sectors of the industry in order to achieve this. Whatever it actually is. There would also be public participation in organisations such as Turespaña (the national tourism promotion agency), with the whole plan aimed at breaking the "monoculture" of sun-and-beach tourism, which he sees as the "main culprit" in having caused seasonality, a lack of innovation and property speculation.
As a manifesto, it is a fine set of platitudes, albeit that a fifteen-year strategic plan and the involvement of different agents in the tourism sector (plus the public) does have some merit. But it is one which, not unnaturally, has drawn some criticism. One of the sources is the tourism consultant, Antonio Garzón. You wouldn't expect him to side with Podemos, and nor does he. For example, he challenges the whole argument about forty years of mistakes. Without those years (of tourism development), where would the welfare of a majority of Spaniards be? Labuske argues that the sun-and-beach model is "obsolete", a charge that Garzón firmly disputes. The need is for complementary models of tourism, not the dismantling of the primary one.
It is on the whole issue of sustainability where Garzón lets fly. On the sustainability concept, he calls it a "hackneyed tourism myth", saying that the tourism sector doesn't need anyone (such as Podemos or indeed Més in the Balearics) to come up with a plan for it, when environmental management is "highly developed" in most of Spain's tourism destinations. And on this, Garzón is right. One only, as an example, has to think of the checks and balances that have prevented the development of the hotel complex near Es Trenc beach.
The other new(ish) kids on the political block, Ciudadanos (C's), have had rather longer than Podemos to come up with their tourism policy. As a party they are almost ten years old now, and it might be suggested that it is this greater maturity which has pushed them well ahead of Podemos in the polls. The C's and the party leader, Albert Rivera, derive a great deal of support from the tourism sector: they are the polar opposite of Podemos in this regard.
One of their candidates for Congress, Francisco de la Torre, has been speaking this week about the C's programme for tourism, and fundamental to this would be the granting of hoteliers' wishes in cutting the tourist rate of IVA (VAT). It has been the failure of the Partido Popular to do this which, more than anything, has driven the tourism industry towards the C's. (The performance of Mallorca's Isabel Borrego as national secretary-of-state for tourism has been another.) Their plan is one for competitiveness.
The PP had promised prior to the last election that the tourist rate would go down to the super-reduced level of 4%. Instead, the Rajoy government put it up from 8% to 10%. The hoteliers were far from impressed. The C's are saying that there would be an intermediate reduction to 7%, with the aim of applying the super-reduced rate later. The party would also pursue a policy of language training and teaching, primarily with tourism in mind. Tourism professionals of the future, the C's say, must have a strong grasp on languages as a means of advancing tourism competitiveness. If they get into government, one can imagine some of the Balearic teaching brigade will prepare itself for another battle over language.
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
The Long Hello And Goodbye
In the final week before the national election, no polls can be published; they might distort public opinion, or so the theory goes. Come the final 24 hours before the election, and everyone has to shut up and allow themselves a period of reflection before heading to the polls on Sunday to do the awful deed.
Putting a block on more polls is unnecessary; there hasn’t been a need for polls for months. PSOE’s long goodbye should go into the Guinness Book of Records for the most time it has been known that a political party would lose the next election. And badly.
Nothing has altered the path to the inevitable Partido Popular victory: not a Rubalcaba bounce when Zapatero confirmed that he knew the way the wind was blowing; not a surge of support from the right when PSOE carved up the constitution and committed the deficit requirement to law; not a wave of thanks to PSOE when ETA called it a day.
The eclipse of PSOE on Sunday will be the culmination of the process started by the credit crunch and Zapatero’s attempts to calm a nation’s fears. By saying there was no crisis, he was whistling in the dark; his delusion, a fiddling of inaction while capitalism burned. He responded too slowly, but he was damned if he did and damned if he didn’t. The game was up as soon as crisis raised its unlovely head. The story would have been the same had the PP been in government - and they know it.
Mariano Rajoy will be the next president of Spain, and president, by title and tradition going back to the nineteenth century, it is; calling him prime minister is in line with how titles normally work in a parliamentary monarchy. Rajoy’s ascendancy has been the long hello, so long in fact it is difficult to understand how he comes to still figure. Beaten by Zapatero in 2008, long dismissed as inadequate by many commentators and even members of his own party, one of them being the former PM José Maria Aznar, it is a mystery what he is doing about to take office.
Rajoy is becoming prime minister (president) by default. He has had to do nothing and say nothing. The prize has been his ever since the flames from Lehman and utterances regarding the previously unheard of subprime market first flickered across dealers' screens. Prime minister by default and prime minister by superior force and direction. Just as the Balearics Bauzá is a puppet on a long string stretching from PP central office, so Rajoy dances to the tune of his own master. And if Rubalcaba is to be believed, that is Aznar; Aznar who has been contemptuous of his successor and now treats him as the dummy to his ventriloquism.
The electoral slogan for Rajoy is both simple and simplistic. "Súmate al cambio". Join the change, more or less. When all else fails, and it normally does, politicians bring out the change word. It is the default slogan for a default prime minister; vote for me, I'm not the other lot. But what will Rajoy change? More pain and more austerity are not change; they are more pain and more austerity, and the electorate is heading to the polling stations to vote for masochism.
"Masoquismo" and "machismo". Macho politics with which to confront the unions and employment conditions. Mariano as Margaret, tackling the enemy within. Change is necessary, but at what cost socially (and industrially), as Thatcher stubbornly ignored. The unions, though, have been but one part of the collusive complacency of Spain's social capitalism model; they have been a loveably roguish pantomime villain to the Prince Charmings of successive governments of both blue and red who have flaunted the glass slippers of boom-time politics.
It was Zapatero's misfortune to be the shoemaker who couldn't repair the slipper. He can be accused of a lack of foresight, but foresight with hindsight is a wonderful thing; he danced to his own tune, as had previous Spanish leaders, one with an exciting boom-boom beat, but he ended up a busted flush and a boom-time rat.
Yet for all this, Zapatero helped to mould a Spain far more at ease with itself. The pain that Rajoy is about to inflict, and it is going to be painful, might just be acceptable, though by no means to all, but if he insists on a change that is a back to the future in terms of cultural, social and religious policies, he may not find the populace so willing to support him.
Come Sunday, the electorate of turkeys will vote for Christmas, and after Sunday, things will change. Just don't expect them to be very pleasant.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Putting a block on more polls is unnecessary; there hasn’t been a need for polls for months. PSOE’s long goodbye should go into the Guinness Book of Records for the most time it has been known that a political party would lose the next election. And badly.
Nothing has altered the path to the inevitable Partido Popular victory: not a Rubalcaba bounce when Zapatero confirmed that he knew the way the wind was blowing; not a surge of support from the right when PSOE carved up the constitution and committed the deficit requirement to law; not a wave of thanks to PSOE when ETA called it a day.
The eclipse of PSOE on Sunday will be the culmination of the process started by the credit crunch and Zapatero’s attempts to calm a nation’s fears. By saying there was no crisis, he was whistling in the dark; his delusion, a fiddling of inaction while capitalism burned. He responded too slowly, but he was damned if he did and damned if he didn’t. The game was up as soon as crisis raised its unlovely head. The story would have been the same had the PP been in government - and they know it.
Mariano Rajoy will be the next president of Spain, and president, by title and tradition going back to the nineteenth century, it is; calling him prime minister is in line with how titles normally work in a parliamentary monarchy. Rajoy’s ascendancy has been the long hello, so long in fact it is difficult to understand how he comes to still figure. Beaten by Zapatero in 2008, long dismissed as inadequate by many commentators and even members of his own party, one of them being the former PM José Maria Aznar, it is a mystery what he is doing about to take office.
Rajoy is becoming prime minister (president) by default. He has had to do nothing and say nothing. The prize has been his ever since the flames from Lehman and utterances regarding the previously unheard of subprime market first flickered across dealers' screens. Prime minister by default and prime minister by superior force and direction. Just as the Balearics Bauzá is a puppet on a long string stretching from PP central office, so Rajoy dances to the tune of his own master. And if Rubalcaba is to be believed, that is Aznar; Aznar who has been contemptuous of his successor and now treats him as the dummy to his ventriloquism.
The electoral slogan for Rajoy is both simple and simplistic. "Súmate al cambio". Join the change, more or less. When all else fails, and it normally does, politicians bring out the change word. It is the default slogan for a default prime minister; vote for me, I'm not the other lot. But what will Rajoy change? More pain and more austerity are not change; they are more pain and more austerity, and the electorate is heading to the polling stations to vote for masochism.
"Masoquismo" and "machismo". Macho politics with which to confront the unions and employment conditions. Mariano as Margaret, tackling the enemy within. Change is necessary, but at what cost socially (and industrially), as Thatcher stubbornly ignored. The unions, though, have been but one part of the collusive complacency of Spain's social capitalism model; they have been a loveably roguish pantomime villain to the Prince Charmings of successive governments of both blue and red who have flaunted the glass slippers of boom-time politics.
It was Zapatero's misfortune to be the shoemaker who couldn't repair the slipper. He can be accused of a lack of foresight, but foresight with hindsight is a wonderful thing; he danced to his own tune, as had previous Spanish leaders, one with an exciting boom-boom beat, but he ended up a busted flush and a boom-time rat.
Yet for all this, Zapatero helped to mould a Spain far more at ease with itself. The pain that Rajoy is about to inflict, and it is going to be painful, might just be acceptable, though by no means to all, but if he insists on a change that is a back to the future in terms of cultural, social and religious policies, he may not find the populace so willing to support him.
Come Sunday, the electorate of turkeys will vote for Christmas, and after Sunday, things will change. Just don't expect them to be very pleasant.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Face To Face
Face to face, face off, face up to facts, put a brave face on things, put a face to someone. Idiomatic contortions of "face" just go to emphasise how important the face is.
The face determines much. It determines reaction and impression by others, and it betrays reaction and impression on behalf of the "face" him or herself. Face to face, "cara a cara", determined much. This was the face off between the Spanish prime ministerial candidates, facing up to the facts that inform the election, or diligently ignoring them, one putting a brave face on things, both being people you could put a face to.
Even if you were already familiar with the faces of Mariano Rajoy and Alfredo Rubalcaba, exposed to the television camera, facing each other across a vast desk, you saw things you hadn't previously. Rubalcaba looked younger than his Solzhenitsyn appearance suggests, though he seemed to visibly age during his encounter with Rajoy who had seemed to have taken a leaf out of his predecessor Aznar's book and had formed an acquaintance with hair dye; his beard looked strangely grey against a full head of vibrant brown.
The electoral debate on Spanish television was an event akin to a major football final. The lead-up was endless, a clock in the top right-hand corner giving a countdown to how long it was before the face to face occurred. Analysts there were in abundance, children had been asked as to their choice of next prime minister, campaign leaders of the two camps talked up their boys, the one heading the PSOE campaign standing in front of a legend which read "formularubalcaba"; socialist medicine, one presumed.
Then there were the presenters. Spanish television has taken the message of equality to the extreme. Barely a male was to be seen amidst the great numbers of female presenters. And what strikes one about them is the fact that nearly all are gorgeous. There aren't many heirs to the throne or Spanish national football team captains and goalkeepers to go around, but a career in television does offer its marital and partner opportunities, though what does one make of the strikingly blonde Maria Casado, whose surname suggests that she already is married?
And so, eventually, to the face to face itself. The moderator wished everyone a good evening, including America, which might not have been glued to television screens as much as he might have hoped; Obama, one imagines, had better things to do than devote a couple of hours to potential leaders of a country that barely registers in the international scheme of things.
Though of course it might register, if the economy goes totally belly-up, and it was this, the economy, that formed the first part of the debate, the rules being set out by our moderator friend, a moustachioed gentleman with a resemblance to Bob Carolgees minus Spit the Dog.
It mattered little what was actually said. Far more important was the watching, the studying of the faces. Here were the two men with the fate of a nation in their hands, and what a choice they offer. The best one might say about either is that he is a safe pair of hands, possibly, but both are terminally dull, terminally bearded and grey, despite the efforts of the make-up people. Spain doesn't do charisma politics.
They argued occasionally, some heat was given off, dismissiveness of the opponent was shown on the face, but only once was there genuine contempt, Rubalcaba's glance at Rajoy during the bit on social policies saying all you needed to know. It was all pretty well-mannered and formal. "Señor Rajoy" and "Señor Rubalcaba"; both deployed the "usted" form. Little enlivened proceedings except for when Rubalcaba suddenly produced a graphic during the pensions debate; it was as though he were on a chat show and had remembered that he had a book to promote or as though he were on "Blue Peter" - here's a graphic I made earlier.
When it came to an end, you were none the wiser. Bob Carolgees signed off events with thanks all round. There was no shaking of hands, no smiles for the camera, just a long, lingering shot of the desk on a stage in front of an absent audience. Frankly, it had all been an enervating experience, but then politics often are, especially when the protagonists are as stripped of vitality as these two.
Rajoy probably won, but then so he should as he went into the face to face in a position of strength, PSOE fast disappearing down the opinion poll plug hole. Rubalcaba's face will have done little to have reversed the trend.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
The face determines much. It determines reaction and impression by others, and it betrays reaction and impression on behalf of the "face" him or herself. Face to face, "cara a cara", determined much. This was the face off between the Spanish prime ministerial candidates, facing up to the facts that inform the election, or diligently ignoring them, one putting a brave face on things, both being people you could put a face to.
Even if you were already familiar with the faces of Mariano Rajoy and Alfredo Rubalcaba, exposed to the television camera, facing each other across a vast desk, you saw things you hadn't previously. Rubalcaba looked younger than his Solzhenitsyn appearance suggests, though he seemed to visibly age during his encounter with Rajoy who had seemed to have taken a leaf out of his predecessor Aznar's book and had formed an acquaintance with hair dye; his beard looked strangely grey against a full head of vibrant brown.
The electoral debate on Spanish television was an event akin to a major football final. The lead-up was endless, a clock in the top right-hand corner giving a countdown to how long it was before the face to face occurred. Analysts there were in abundance, children had been asked as to their choice of next prime minister, campaign leaders of the two camps talked up their boys, the one heading the PSOE campaign standing in front of a legend which read "formularubalcaba"; socialist medicine, one presumed.
Then there were the presenters. Spanish television has taken the message of equality to the extreme. Barely a male was to be seen amidst the great numbers of female presenters. And what strikes one about them is the fact that nearly all are gorgeous. There aren't many heirs to the throne or Spanish national football team captains and goalkeepers to go around, but a career in television does offer its marital and partner opportunities, though what does one make of the strikingly blonde Maria Casado, whose surname suggests that she already is married?
And so, eventually, to the face to face itself. The moderator wished everyone a good evening, including America, which might not have been glued to television screens as much as he might have hoped; Obama, one imagines, had better things to do than devote a couple of hours to potential leaders of a country that barely registers in the international scheme of things.
Though of course it might register, if the economy goes totally belly-up, and it was this, the economy, that formed the first part of the debate, the rules being set out by our moderator friend, a moustachioed gentleman with a resemblance to Bob Carolgees minus Spit the Dog.
It mattered little what was actually said. Far more important was the watching, the studying of the faces. Here were the two men with the fate of a nation in their hands, and what a choice they offer. The best one might say about either is that he is a safe pair of hands, possibly, but both are terminally dull, terminally bearded and grey, despite the efforts of the make-up people. Spain doesn't do charisma politics.
They argued occasionally, some heat was given off, dismissiveness of the opponent was shown on the face, but only once was there genuine contempt, Rubalcaba's glance at Rajoy during the bit on social policies saying all you needed to know. It was all pretty well-mannered and formal. "Señor Rajoy" and "Señor Rubalcaba"; both deployed the "usted" form. Little enlivened proceedings except for when Rubalcaba suddenly produced a graphic during the pensions debate; it was as though he were on a chat show and had remembered that he had a book to promote or as though he were on "Blue Peter" - here's a graphic I made earlier.
When it came to an end, you were none the wiser. Bob Carolgees signed off events with thanks all round. There was no shaking of hands, no smiles for the camera, just a long, lingering shot of the desk on a stage in front of an absent audience. Frankly, it had all been an enervating experience, but then politics often are, especially when the protagonists are as stripped of vitality as these two.
Rajoy probably won, but then so he should as he went into the face to face in a position of strength, PSOE fast disappearing down the opinion poll plug hole. Rubalcaba's face will have done little to have reversed the trend.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Saturday, November 05, 2011
Tourism Made Simple For Politicians
Amazing. Rajoy speaks! He has left it late, but with just a couple weeks remaining before the general election it is about time that he proved that he hadn't permanently lost his voice. He has been speaking, and what words of wisdom have been pouring out of the Partido Popular's prime ministerial candidate. Words of tourism wisdom.
Somewhere in the bowels of PP HQ is a room where candidates are taken to be given their primers on subjects they have no knowledge of, like tourism for instance. Various strategists, PR people and speech-writers sit the candidates down and open the "Juanita y Juan" book of tourism made simple for politicians.
"Right now, Mariano, repeat after me. Quality tourism." "Quality tourism." "Good. Do you know what it means?" "Erm ..." "Not to worry because it doesn't mean anything. Now, listen carefully, I will read out a list of things that will overcome seasonality and I want you to then repeat them. Understood?" "Seasonality. Yes, good, it's a bit of problem for tourism. Isn't it?" "It is, so it's very important that you know what you're talking about. Here goes. Culture, nature, nautical, sport, film, gastronomy, bird-watching and golf." "Ah, golf! Yes. Seve Ballesteros. Fore!" "Yes, Mariano, unfortunately he is in fact dead."
Rajoy has certainly been taking his lessons seriously. He has come up with a cunning plan. He's going to tackle structural problems of the tourism sector, such as there being too many obsolete resorts. Gosh, what an original thought. Where have we heard this before? Ah yes, Playa de Palma. How long has it taken for its redevelopment not to occur? Only about seven years. So far.
What is actually meant by obsolete? Given that Spanish and Mallorcan resorts grew up in the sixties and seventies, it probably means they're all obsolete. The sort of investment that would be required to make them un-obsolete will mean they remain obsolete for a further 40 or 50 years, by which time they will probably have fallen down anyway.
But then, investment has been available. Or was. Supposedly. Go back to 2008 and you may recall that 500 million euros were going to be pumped into updating tourism resorts. What do you mean, you don't recall? They most certainly were. Something got in the way, though.
Also back in 2008 there was another little scheme, not a million miles away from what Rajoy has in mind for combating seasonality. Come on, you must remember the Winter in Spain campaign. Nope? Well, you wouldn't be the only one, as it was quietly forgotten about not long after it was announced. Yet this was all part of the drive to get those high-spending European oldsters beating a winter path to the Balearics and elsewhere; the same European oldsters who will now not be coming this winter because there's no money to subsidise their trips.
Despite having done his tourism homework, learnt his lines and acquired a status as the new guru of tourism, Rajoy is being pressurised by the tourism industry into giving them back their national tourism minister. There used to be one, the Mallorcan Joan Mesquida, before he got downgraded and became a mere secretary, or whatever it was he became. And he certainly knows a thing or two about tourism. As former finance minister for the Balearics, he was co-author of the eco-tax, that spectacular disaster of tourism PR that was jettisoned when the first Antich administration was turfed out of office.
There again, and as with the non-forthcoming 500 million investment and Winter in Spain campaign, this was all the fault of socialists. Haven't got a clue when it comes to tourism. Not like Rajoy, good old capitalist right-winger that he is. Mariano's going to have tourists flocking to Mallorca (and Spain) in winter, looking at birds and tucking into bowls of tumbet. No one's ever thought of that before. He's going to change the image of Spain and make it a tourist destination of quality with the quality tourists to match; none of the bloody riff-raff that's coming in at present on their easyJets.
Yep, tourism has a bright future under Mariano, as he is clearly a quick learner, and he doesn't always need the strategists to tell him what to say. The environment? No problem. Climate change doesn't exist, as his cousin told him it didn't. The economy? Well, he can probably a find a bloke in a pub to tell him how to fix that. And you wonder why, as Wikileaks proved, former premier Aznar has always had his doubts about him.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Somewhere in the bowels of PP HQ is a room where candidates are taken to be given their primers on subjects they have no knowledge of, like tourism for instance. Various strategists, PR people and speech-writers sit the candidates down and open the "Juanita y Juan" book of tourism made simple for politicians.
"Right now, Mariano, repeat after me. Quality tourism." "Quality tourism." "Good. Do you know what it means?" "Erm ..." "Not to worry because it doesn't mean anything. Now, listen carefully, I will read out a list of things that will overcome seasonality and I want you to then repeat them. Understood?" "Seasonality. Yes, good, it's a bit of problem for tourism. Isn't it?" "It is, so it's very important that you know what you're talking about. Here goes. Culture, nature, nautical, sport, film, gastronomy, bird-watching and golf." "Ah, golf! Yes. Seve Ballesteros. Fore!" "Yes, Mariano, unfortunately he is in fact dead."
Rajoy has certainly been taking his lessons seriously. He has come up with a cunning plan. He's going to tackle structural problems of the tourism sector, such as there being too many obsolete resorts. Gosh, what an original thought. Where have we heard this before? Ah yes, Playa de Palma. How long has it taken for its redevelopment not to occur? Only about seven years. So far.
What is actually meant by obsolete? Given that Spanish and Mallorcan resorts grew up in the sixties and seventies, it probably means they're all obsolete. The sort of investment that would be required to make them un-obsolete will mean they remain obsolete for a further 40 or 50 years, by which time they will probably have fallen down anyway.
But then, investment has been available. Or was. Supposedly. Go back to 2008 and you may recall that 500 million euros were going to be pumped into updating tourism resorts. What do you mean, you don't recall? They most certainly were. Something got in the way, though.
Also back in 2008 there was another little scheme, not a million miles away from what Rajoy has in mind for combating seasonality. Come on, you must remember the Winter in Spain campaign. Nope? Well, you wouldn't be the only one, as it was quietly forgotten about not long after it was announced. Yet this was all part of the drive to get those high-spending European oldsters beating a winter path to the Balearics and elsewhere; the same European oldsters who will now not be coming this winter because there's no money to subsidise their trips.
Despite having done his tourism homework, learnt his lines and acquired a status as the new guru of tourism, Rajoy is being pressurised by the tourism industry into giving them back their national tourism minister. There used to be one, the Mallorcan Joan Mesquida, before he got downgraded and became a mere secretary, or whatever it was he became. And he certainly knows a thing or two about tourism. As former finance minister for the Balearics, he was co-author of the eco-tax, that spectacular disaster of tourism PR that was jettisoned when the first Antich administration was turfed out of office.
There again, and as with the non-forthcoming 500 million investment and Winter in Spain campaign, this was all the fault of socialists. Haven't got a clue when it comes to tourism. Not like Rajoy, good old capitalist right-winger that he is. Mariano's going to have tourists flocking to Mallorca (and Spain) in winter, looking at birds and tucking into bowls of tumbet. No one's ever thought of that before. He's going to change the image of Spain and make it a tourist destination of quality with the quality tourists to match; none of the bloody riff-raff that's coming in at present on their easyJets.
Yep, tourism has a bright future under Mariano, as he is clearly a quick learner, and he doesn't always need the strategists to tell him what to say. The environment? No problem. Climate change doesn't exist, as his cousin told him it didn't. The economy? Well, he can probably a find a bloke in a pub to tell him how to fix that. And you wonder why, as Wikileaks proved, former premier Aznar has always had his doubts about him.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
The Bishop, The Politicians And The Gays
If you fancy being a bishop, then having a Christian name of Jesús is probably no great disadvantage. And so it is with the Bishop of Mallorca, Jesús Murgui. But neither his status as bishop nor his Christological appellation absolve him from criticism; he gets it in not inconsiderable amounts.
Jesús Murgui became bishop in 2004, succeeding Teodor Úbeda, who had been Mallorca's bishop for 30 years and who had cultivated a reputation for being progressive. It is a reputation that Monseñor Murgui appears not to share. He is said to be a confederate of the archbishops of Madrid and Barcelona and formerly of the late archbishop of Valencia (Agustín García-Gasco who died in May); these three archbishops have been described as the most reactionary and conservative in the Spanish church.
Monseñor Murgui has another type of reputation, a less than wonderful one among the local Spanish media and also among his own priests.
When the press claims that a typical reaction towards the bishop among Mallorcan clergy is one of sarcasm, this may well serve the press's agenda. Sections of the media are suspicious of him, to the point of being antagonistic. And partly, this is because he never speaks to them. In his seven years as bishop, he has given not one interview to the press. Where his reticence is excused, it is not on the grounds of shyness, but on a wish to avoid getting too political.
The problem for the bishop, though, is that, despite his reluctance to engage with the media, his views are known and they are political (in the current social climate of Spain), while he represents an institution, the Catholic Church, which is anything but indifferent to politics.
The First Estate of the Catholic Church is heavily politicised and seeks to influence the political process, and this is especially so in Spain, despite Roman Catholicism having been abandoned as the official religion and despite also a dramatic fall in church-going. It is this seeking of influence that makes the Fourth Estate of the press so ready to leap onto what emanates from the Church. And much has been emanating, much that will be espoused from pulpits this weekend.
The Spanish Episcopal Conference, its president is Cardinal Antonio María Rouco Varela, the Archbishop of Madrid, has recently met. As is customary prior to a national election, it has had something to say for itself, as has Monseñor Murgui. There is little difference between the sentiments of the Conference and those of the bishop, which are being shared with the faithful, three weeks or so before the election.
It will come as no surprise that the bishop is not exactly supportive of issues such as abortion and gay marriage, but what has really stirred things up is that his letter, due to be read out in churches on the island, points to the "danger" of voting for politicians who support gay marriage and to "impositions" by the State. By politicians, he really means political parties, and by implication he lends his support firmly to one party - the Partido Popular.
The PP doesn't need the Church's support to win the election. Though as a party it is identified closely with the Church, it would probably prefer that the bishop, and the Episcopal Conference, in fact kept quiet. Social issues are unlikely to be prominent at hustings for an election that is all about Spain's economy, but they may not be overlooked by much of an electorate which, dissatisfied with PSOE's handling of the economy, has nevertheless broadly agreed with its social policies and with its attitude towards the Church.
For example, an investigation last year by the Mallorcan research organisation Gadeso into religious attitudes found that a majority between the ages of 16 and 59 supported gay marriage. A surprisingly high 35% of those over the age of 60 also supported it. The Church is out of step with social attitudes, just as it has become increasingly out of step with society as a whole and offers waning influence.
One suspects, however, that it sees the election of a PP government as a chance to grab back some influence, hence its pronouncements ahead of the election. For the PP though, it would be a huge mistake if it were to try and turn the clock back. There are unquestionably elements within the PP who would want to do just that, and there is always the suspicion that lurking somewhere in its background is the influence of the mysterious Opus Dei. But as a government it will have enough on its plate without seeking to send Spain back to a reactionary age.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Jesús Murgui became bishop in 2004, succeeding Teodor Úbeda, who had been Mallorca's bishop for 30 years and who had cultivated a reputation for being progressive. It is a reputation that Monseñor Murgui appears not to share. He is said to be a confederate of the archbishops of Madrid and Barcelona and formerly of the late archbishop of Valencia (Agustín García-Gasco who died in May); these three archbishops have been described as the most reactionary and conservative in the Spanish church.
Monseñor Murgui has another type of reputation, a less than wonderful one among the local Spanish media and also among his own priests.
When the press claims that a typical reaction towards the bishop among Mallorcan clergy is one of sarcasm, this may well serve the press's agenda. Sections of the media are suspicious of him, to the point of being antagonistic. And partly, this is because he never speaks to them. In his seven years as bishop, he has given not one interview to the press. Where his reticence is excused, it is not on the grounds of shyness, but on a wish to avoid getting too political.
The problem for the bishop, though, is that, despite his reluctance to engage with the media, his views are known and they are political (in the current social climate of Spain), while he represents an institution, the Catholic Church, which is anything but indifferent to politics.
The First Estate of the Catholic Church is heavily politicised and seeks to influence the political process, and this is especially so in Spain, despite Roman Catholicism having been abandoned as the official religion and despite also a dramatic fall in church-going. It is this seeking of influence that makes the Fourth Estate of the press so ready to leap onto what emanates from the Church. And much has been emanating, much that will be espoused from pulpits this weekend.
The Spanish Episcopal Conference, its president is Cardinal Antonio María Rouco Varela, the Archbishop of Madrid, has recently met. As is customary prior to a national election, it has had something to say for itself, as has Monseñor Murgui. There is little difference between the sentiments of the Conference and those of the bishop, which are being shared with the faithful, three weeks or so before the election.
It will come as no surprise that the bishop is not exactly supportive of issues such as abortion and gay marriage, but what has really stirred things up is that his letter, due to be read out in churches on the island, points to the "danger" of voting for politicians who support gay marriage and to "impositions" by the State. By politicians, he really means political parties, and by implication he lends his support firmly to one party - the Partido Popular.
The PP doesn't need the Church's support to win the election. Though as a party it is identified closely with the Church, it would probably prefer that the bishop, and the Episcopal Conference, in fact kept quiet. Social issues are unlikely to be prominent at hustings for an election that is all about Spain's economy, but they may not be overlooked by much of an electorate which, dissatisfied with PSOE's handling of the economy, has nevertheless broadly agreed with its social policies and with its attitude towards the Church.
For example, an investigation last year by the Mallorcan research organisation Gadeso into religious attitudes found that a majority between the ages of 16 and 59 supported gay marriage. A surprisingly high 35% of those over the age of 60 also supported it. The Church is out of step with social attitudes, just as it has become increasingly out of step with society as a whole and offers waning influence.
One suspects, however, that it sees the election of a PP government as a chance to grab back some influence, hence its pronouncements ahead of the election. For the PP though, it would be a huge mistake if it were to try and turn the clock back. There are unquestionably elements within the PP who would want to do just that, and there is always the suspicion that lurking somewhere in its background is the influence of the mysterious Opus Dei. But as a government it will have enough on its plate without seeking to send Spain back to a reactionary age.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Friday, October 21, 2011
MALLORCA TODAY - ETA announces definitive end to terrorism campaign
ETA has announced that it has called for a definitive cessation to its terrorist campaign. Prime Minister Zapatero has described this as a victory for democracy and reason. The ETA announcement comes exactly a month before the national elections in Spain and just after a conference attended by Kofi Annan and Gerry Adams. There is a link between ETA and the Spanish elections in that it was wrongly blamed for the Madrid bombings in 2004 by the then ruling Partido Popular whose handling of the bombings was partly responsible for a surprise win for Zapatero's PSOE socialists. The PSOE candidate this time is Alfredo Rubalcaba, the former interior minister and someone therefore well versed with ETA matters. It might be thought that the ETA announcement could be a boost to PSOE at the election, though it has been accused in the past of being soft on terrorism. Partido Popular candidate Mariano Rajoy has played down the announcement, not surprisingly perhaps in that he doesn't wish to give PSOE any advantage, by saying that Spain will not be at ease until ETA fully dissolves and disarms.
Monday, March 10, 2008
And The Winner Is ...
So in the end the economy and the shooting of Isaías Carrasco did not persuade the Spanish electorate to boot out the PSOE regime of Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. The PSOE actually increased the number of deputies in Congress, as indeed did the opposition PP. The socialists now start the horse-trading with the minority parties, but they are assured of another coalition government and four more years in power.
The killing of the socialist councillor Carrasco, attributed to ETA, was, some said, likely to sway the voter towards the PP and towards its leader Mariano Rajoy who had made much of Zapatero being soft on terrorism. When the election was first announced and the potential threat of terrorism influencing the result was therefore raised, I argued that were there to be an act it might work in the PSOE's favour. If anything, this may indeed have happened. The electorate, this time round, has recognised the role of terrorists for what it is, a cynical means of attempting to undermine the democratic process, and the electorate has rejected this role, in the same way that it has rejected Rajoy's assertions regarding a lack of toughness on the part of Zapatero.
The failing economy gave the electorate a reason for booting out the PSOE, but it has stood by the party, which makes one wonder if the liberalism shown by the PSOE during its first four years is something that appeals to current-day Spain. Rajoy and the PP appear too much something of the past, of the Church and conservatism; the PSOE is more in tune with societal trends even if these bring it into conflict with the Church over issues such as divorce and same-sex marriages. The PP, despite spinning the result as being "satisfactory" in that they increased the number of deputies, has some soul-searching to do. Like its British Conservative counterpart, it needs to broaden its appeal and to find a leader who is more sympathetic than Rajoy.
That's the politics, but what of election night itself? The television presentation is, in some respects, similar to that for a UK election. Various graphics and computerised "swingometers", but two presenters who looked like they were presiding over the Eurovision Song Contest is not quite what one might expect of Dimbleby and Paxman. Then there were the abbreviations. They love abbreviations here. The election was therefore "E08" (elecciones 2008), the date was 9-M (9 March). The studio pundits were arranged in front of their own individual laptops, peering into them as though they were a bunch of people working in an estate-agent's office (what do estate agents find so vital that they have to look constantly at a PC screen?). The female moderator of the pundits had scrubbed up nicely. Looked a million dollars in fact. Perhaps she should have been presenting Eurovision.
There are none of the excruciating vote readings like in the UK, with the recording officer stumbling over the numbers and the nutter from the Monster Raving Loony Party wearing a Teletubbies outfit. Everything gets channelled through something called a data centre where another well-scrubbed female presenter reels off boring statistics and people mill in the background drinking beer. There are though gatherings of supporters at HQs, both in Madrid. But being Spain, the flag-waving supporters are all out in the street under huge posters of Zapatero and Rajoy with the inevitable DJ pounding out some music and a production cheerleader getting the masses to wave their flags more enthusiastically whenever the camera pans onto them.
Personally, it doesn't really bother me who has won. Most expats, I would guess, would have preferred a PP victory (if they had a view at all, which in most cases they would not have) and then only because of potential tax cuts. Impression is all important in politics, and it is impression that would have guided me had I had a vote. To this end, I am glad that Zapatero has won.
QUIZ
Yesterday - The Clash. Today's title - a line from a rather daft soul song.
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
The killing of the socialist councillor Carrasco, attributed to ETA, was, some said, likely to sway the voter towards the PP and towards its leader Mariano Rajoy who had made much of Zapatero being soft on terrorism. When the election was first announced and the potential threat of terrorism influencing the result was therefore raised, I argued that were there to be an act it might work in the PSOE's favour. If anything, this may indeed have happened. The electorate, this time round, has recognised the role of terrorists for what it is, a cynical means of attempting to undermine the democratic process, and the electorate has rejected this role, in the same way that it has rejected Rajoy's assertions regarding a lack of toughness on the part of Zapatero.
The failing economy gave the electorate a reason for booting out the PSOE, but it has stood by the party, which makes one wonder if the liberalism shown by the PSOE during its first four years is something that appeals to current-day Spain. Rajoy and the PP appear too much something of the past, of the Church and conservatism; the PSOE is more in tune with societal trends even if these bring it into conflict with the Church over issues such as divorce and same-sex marriages. The PP, despite spinning the result as being "satisfactory" in that they increased the number of deputies, has some soul-searching to do. Like its British Conservative counterpart, it needs to broaden its appeal and to find a leader who is more sympathetic than Rajoy.
That's the politics, but what of election night itself? The television presentation is, in some respects, similar to that for a UK election. Various graphics and computerised "swingometers", but two presenters who looked like they were presiding over the Eurovision Song Contest is not quite what one might expect of Dimbleby and Paxman. Then there were the abbreviations. They love abbreviations here. The election was therefore "E08" (elecciones 2008), the date was 9-M (9 March). The studio pundits were arranged in front of their own individual laptops, peering into them as though they were a bunch of people working in an estate-agent's office (what do estate agents find so vital that they have to look constantly at a PC screen?). The female moderator of the pundits had scrubbed up nicely. Looked a million dollars in fact. Perhaps she should have been presenting Eurovision.
There are none of the excruciating vote readings like in the UK, with the recording officer stumbling over the numbers and the nutter from the Monster Raving Loony Party wearing a Teletubbies outfit. Everything gets channelled through something called a data centre where another well-scrubbed female presenter reels off boring statistics and people mill in the background drinking beer. There are though gatherings of supporters at HQs, both in Madrid. But being Spain, the flag-waving supporters are all out in the street under huge posters of Zapatero and Rajoy with the inevitable DJ pounding out some music and a production cheerleader getting the masses to wave their flags more enthusiastically whenever the camera pans onto them.
Personally, it doesn't really bother me who has won. Most expats, I would guess, would have preferred a PP victory (if they had a view at all, which in most cases they would not have) and then only because of potential tax cuts. Impression is all important in politics, and it is impression that would have guided me had I had a vote. To this end, I am glad that Zapatero has won.
QUIZ
Yesterday - The Clash. Today's title - a line from a rather daft soul song.
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Every Kind Of People – Part 2
Odd indeed for this blog to do a full-article day-after follow-up, but the immigration kerfuffle started by the Partido Popular’s presidential candidate Mariano Rajoy has brought forth more views ‘n’ news – it takes the spectre of a potential (but non-existent) threat to Brit interests to elevate Spanish politics from a state of almost total indifference in the lives of your average expat.
There was something I wanted to add to yesterday’s piece. Well, more than one thing. Firstly, the stink that Rajoy has caused with his talk of an “integration” policy for immigrants should really come as no surprise. Take this – “Interior Minister, Mariano Rajoy, has said: ‘The hope must be that people integrate. If an immigrant wants to live here and claim his rights, he will have obligations like learning to speak the language we all speak here.’ ” This comes from the BBC’s website. It pre-dates the victory of Zapatero in 2004, when Rajoy was a member of the Aznar administration. In other words, he has form, so the charge of opportunism carries less weight.
Secondly, immigration is a difficult subject for politicians, or at least a difficult subject on which to create a balanced and unemotional debate. It is almost inevitable that certain opinions within that debate will arouse a charge of racism or discrimination. It is why many politicians choose to avoid or skirt round it. Unless a free-for-all policy is being proposed, by definition some group or other is liable to be subject to some form of discrimination. However, this is not to let Rajoy off the hook, as his target is pretty clear. He would have been wiser to have called for a nuanced debate on the subject, rather than pandering to electorate fears of Africanisation or some other cultural disruption.
Thirdly, there is the British and EU dimension. Rajoy does not include EU immigration in his proposed policy, whereby new arrivals would sign a form of contract which would oblige them to be good boys and girls and go to Spanish classes (or something like that). EU states are limited in terms of what they can demand or stipulate of incomers from other EU states. They are free, for example, to apply certain discriminatory practices in respect of worker rights if they so wish. Whether people from Britain learn the language is a matter of their choice not for the state to enforce.
It is all the more confusing, therefore, that the leader in this week’s “Euro Weekly” seeks to make some form of capital out of Rajoy’s proposals and their impact on Brits. On the one hand it says that his words are not “aimed at northern Europeans who can’t speak the language”, and then, on the other, asks who Rajoy’s plans are going to affect, answering that “loyal readers” (of his newspaper) should “look in the mirror”. What on Earth does this mean? On the facing page, a short article states that Rajoy’s “proposed measures do not apply to those who come from EU countries”.
Fourthly, one could argue that Rajoy is being consistent in following a line of “Spanishness” in his campaign. He has, after all, managed to upset a fair number of Catalans, Mallorcans and others by stating that his educational policy would see Spanish (Castilian) being used as THE language of education throughout the country.
Finally, local Balearic boss, Francesc Antich (who is PSOE, like the Zapatero government), has become embroiled in the whole immigration saga, with the PP accusing him of not having an immigration policy. Commenting on this, “The Bulletin” makes a very good point, namely that under Antich’s Partido Popular predecessor, Jaume Matas, immigration into the Balearics was positively encouraged in order to provide jobs, mainly in the then booming construction industry. When it suits, it suits; when it doesn’t, it doesn’t. ‘Twas ever thus in politics.
Rajoy may yet win the election. He may yet introduce his immigration policy. But for the British community, it will carry on in largely blissful and total ignorance, unaffected by and disinterested in national politics. The worry about Rajoy, in addition to the opprobrium he has attracted, is, as with his daft comments about climate change, that he is something of a loose cannon and a less than thoughtful one at that.
QUIZ
As it’s the same title, the answer is held over. Sorry about that, folks.
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
There was something I wanted to add to yesterday’s piece. Well, more than one thing. Firstly, the stink that Rajoy has caused with his talk of an “integration” policy for immigrants should really come as no surprise. Take this – “Interior Minister, Mariano Rajoy, has said: ‘The hope must be that people integrate. If an immigrant wants to live here and claim his rights, he will have obligations like learning to speak the language we all speak here.’ ” This comes from the BBC’s website. It pre-dates the victory of Zapatero in 2004, when Rajoy was a member of the Aznar administration. In other words, he has form, so the charge of opportunism carries less weight.
Secondly, immigration is a difficult subject for politicians, or at least a difficult subject on which to create a balanced and unemotional debate. It is almost inevitable that certain opinions within that debate will arouse a charge of racism or discrimination. It is why many politicians choose to avoid or skirt round it. Unless a free-for-all policy is being proposed, by definition some group or other is liable to be subject to some form of discrimination. However, this is not to let Rajoy off the hook, as his target is pretty clear. He would have been wiser to have called for a nuanced debate on the subject, rather than pandering to electorate fears of Africanisation or some other cultural disruption.
Thirdly, there is the British and EU dimension. Rajoy does not include EU immigration in his proposed policy, whereby new arrivals would sign a form of contract which would oblige them to be good boys and girls and go to Spanish classes (or something like that). EU states are limited in terms of what they can demand or stipulate of incomers from other EU states. They are free, for example, to apply certain discriminatory practices in respect of worker rights if they so wish. Whether people from Britain learn the language is a matter of their choice not for the state to enforce.
It is all the more confusing, therefore, that the leader in this week’s “Euro Weekly” seeks to make some form of capital out of Rajoy’s proposals and their impact on Brits. On the one hand it says that his words are not “aimed at northern Europeans who can’t speak the language”, and then, on the other, asks who Rajoy’s plans are going to affect, answering that “loyal readers” (of his newspaper) should “look in the mirror”. What on Earth does this mean? On the facing page, a short article states that Rajoy’s “proposed measures do not apply to those who come from EU countries”.
Fourthly, one could argue that Rajoy is being consistent in following a line of “Spanishness” in his campaign. He has, after all, managed to upset a fair number of Catalans, Mallorcans and others by stating that his educational policy would see Spanish (Castilian) being used as THE language of education throughout the country.
Finally, local Balearic boss, Francesc Antich (who is PSOE, like the Zapatero government), has become embroiled in the whole immigration saga, with the PP accusing him of not having an immigration policy. Commenting on this, “The Bulletin” makes a very good point, namely that under Antich’s Partido Popular predecessor, Jaume Matas, immigration into the Balearics was positively encouraged in order to provide jobs, mainly in the then booming construction industry. When it suits, it suits; when it doesn’t, it doesn’t. ‘Twas ever thus in politics.
Rajoy may yet win the election. He may yet introduce his immigration policy. But for the British community, it will carry on in largely blissful and total ignorance, unaffected by and disinterested in national politics. The worry about Rajoy, in addition to the opprobrium he has attracted, is, as with his daft comments about climate change, that he is something of a loose cannon and a less than thoughtful one at that.
QUIZ
As it’s the same title, the answer is held over. Sorry about that, folks.
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Every Kind Of People
Immigration. It has become an election issue. The PP’s Mariano Rajoy has sought to make it one, bringing forth condemnations of racism and xenophobia. But Rajoy is merely reflecting a widely held concern. Social surveys of matters of concern always feature immigration prominently, nowhere more so than in Mallorca. Along with employment, it is often the main concern.
Spain has a long history of immigration and of different cultures. Indeed it was, at one time, a multi-cultural land before the purges of the Jews and the Muslims at the end of the fifteenth century, a time when the notion of Spain became more of a reality through the union of the kingdoms of Castile and Aragon. While the ending of Moorish influence in 1492 is widely known, less well known perhaps is the often harsher treatment of the Jews who, made to become “conversos”, still suffered at the hands of zealous inquisitors. Despite the fears of some that the conversos, some of whom went on to hold positions of power, were not truly committed Christians, Spain began to become Spain – the nation of the Catholic Kings.
Through empire, the slave trade and Spain’s position as a maritime trading nation, immigration was common enough; indeed much of its early mercantile influence was the result of Genoese immigration. In more recent times, however, immigration has been less of an issue, though it is untrue to suggest that there was none during the Franco era. It is only though in the past couple of decades that immigration has made its contemporary mark. And it is the different strands of immigration that lie behind the condemnations of Rajoy. European Union migration and that from central and southern America are one thing, movement of people from other countries, in particular African countries is another thing entirely. You might recall my mentioning that Moroccans comprised the greatest number of foreigners who gained Spanish citizenship last year.
Rajoy wants all immigrants to learn Spanish, he will pursue deportation for law-breakers. It sounds vaguely familiar. In Britain, where multi-culturalism is deemed to have failed, not least by a race-issue mover and shaker like Trevor Philips, a form of assimilation-based monoculturalism is sought, despite what the Archbishop of Canterbury might think. Britain has its bonkers citizenship test; proficiency in the language is not just a political desire, it is socially desirable and desired. Many members of ethnic communities have embraced British culture with a passion that contrasts sharply with an embracing of Spain (and its language) by many British expatriates. Immigration does not have to be a threat to the societal norm, albeit that it might modify that norm to some degree, as it has – continuously – in Britain over centuries.
Immigration may have a history in Spain, but Rajoy is reacting to a relatively recent phenomenon, that of significant inward movement of new peoples. His language may sound sinister to some, but what is a politician to do? At least he is addressing an issue that the opposition would rather not, an issue that the surveys show is of concern. It is though the suggestion of discrimination against certain groups of immigrants that is the worry, and he needs to be more sensitive in this respect. It is also, potentially, just cheap electioneering in that the old canard of immigration equating to loss of employment opportunities is also being aired. But if Rajoy is hinting, through his deportation threat, that Spain would not countenance a form of Londonistan emerging in the country, I’m not sure many would disagree. He needs to be wary of the ease with which the racism charge can be levelled at him and of being charged with political opportunism, but he is not wrong to raise the subject of immigration.
QUIZ
Yesterday – Paul McCartney. Today’s title – no longer with us, but this was a cracking song by this British soul/rock artist.
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Spain has a long history of immigration and of different cultures. Indeed it was, at one time, a multi-cultural land before the purges of the Jews and the Muslims at the end of the fifteenth century, a time when the notion of Spain became more of a reality through the union of the kingdoms of Castile and Aragon. While the ending of Moorish influence in 1492 is widely known, less well known perhaps is the often harsher treatment of the Jews who, made to become “conversos”, still suffered at the hands of zealous inquisitors. Despite the fears of some that the conversos, some of whom went on to hold positions of power, were not truly committed Christians, Spain began to become Spain – the nation of the Catholic Kings.
Through empire, the slave trade and Spain’s position as a maritime trading nation, immigration was common enough; indeed much of its early mercantile influence was the result of Genoese immigration. In more recent times, however, immigration has been less of an issue, though it is untrue to suggest that there was none during the Franco era. It is only though in the past couple of decades that immigration has made its contemporary mark. And it is the different strands of immigration that lie behind the condemnations of Rajoy. European Union migration and that from central and southern America are one thing, movement of people from other countries, in particular African countries is another thing entirely. You might recall my mentioning that Moroccans comprised the greatest number of foreigners who gained Spanish citizenship last year.
Rajoy wants all immigrants to learn Spanish, he will pursue deportation for law-breakers. It sounds vaguely familiar. In Britain, where multi-culturalism is deemed to have failed, not least by a race-issue mover and shaker like Trevor Philips, a form of assimilation-based monoculturalism is sought, despite what the Archbishop of Canterbury might think. Britain has its bonkers citizenship test; proficiency in the language is not just a political desire, it is socially desirable and desired. Many members of ethnic communities have embraced British culture with a passion that contrasts sharply with an embracing of Spain (and its language) by many British expatriates. Immigration does not have to be a threat to the societal norm, albeit that it might modify that norm to some degree, as it has – continuously – in Britain over centuries.
Immigration may have a history in Spain, but Rajoy is reacting to a relatively recent phenomenon, that of significant inward movement of new peoples. His language may sound sinister to some, but what is a politician to do? At least he is addressing an issue that the opposition would rather not, an issue that the surveys show is of concern. It is though the suggestion of discrimination against certain groups of immigrants that is the worry, and he needs to be more sensitive in this respect. It is also, potentially, just cheap electioneering in that the old canard of immigration equating to loss of employment opportunities is also being aired. But if Rajoy is hinting, through his deportation threat, that Spain would not countenance a form of Londonistan emerging in the country, I’m not sure many would disagree. He needs to be wary of the ease with which the racism charge can be levelled at him and of being charged with political opportunism, but he is not wrong to raise the subject of immigration.
QUIZ
Yesterday – Paul McCartney. Today’s title – no longer with us, but this was a cracking song by this British soul/rock artist.
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Sunday, January 20, 2008
The Commitments
The general election announced, now the discussion, a discussion not of a party political nature but of voting rights.
The editor of “The Bulletin” has bemoaned the fact that, being British, he is denied a vote. Letters to the paper dispute his entitlement, a point of the letter-writers being that there is a way to gain the vote, which is to “commit” to Spain and become a citizen. The editor responds by declaring that he is “European” and that, given freedom of movement within the European Union, the right to vote should come as part of that movement.
This is a loaded exchange. I shall try and keep it brief.
What does it mean to “commit” to Spain? Gaining citizenship may be a legalistic way of declaring this, but commitment goes way deeper. A national of one country has a psychological and sociological bond with the country of origin, one formed by family, culture and language. A change in citizenship does not necessarily change the way one “feels” or indeed the way one “is”. The commitment line of argument is largely specious, except in the case of second or later generations.
There are nearly 20,000 people from the UK registered in the Balearics. This past week, there were some figures released for the number of Spanish citizenships granted to people of different countries of origin. I wish I had now kept the paper in which these were published, but I can recall the figure for the UK was very low. The greatest number was for people from a country not in the EU – Morocco. I know only one British “expatriate” who for sure has Spanish citizenship. Maybe there are more, but one doesn’t as a rule interrogate friends or acquaintances as to their citizenship.
Insofar as a foreign national chooses to live in another country and contributes to its economy and pays its taxes (aspects linked to national politics), one might argue that there is a case for voting rights. But nations jealously guard their enfranchisements and active engagement with the political process. Even in the land of the free – the USA – a foreign-born politician cannot stand as President. Arnold Schwarzenegger could never go for the White House. There are limits to the extent that nations allow other nationals to affect their politics. The European Union is not a harmonised political entity, even if some might wish that it were. Free movement there may be, but national elections are still a matter for individual countries. In a country where immigration is a topic that exercises voters, one can well imagine the canción y baile amongst Spanish voters if foreigners were suddenly allowed to choose between Zapatero and Rajoy.
But the franchise does allow for non-Spaniards to vote, and that is at what currently passes for the level of centrality in EU democracy – the European Parliament. Free movement within Europe, freedom to vote for the institution that does represent Europe. The editor is European, he’s said as much, thus he has a vote. He is not Spanish, therefore he does not have a vote in the Spanish elections.
Let us assume though that those of voting age among these 20,000 Balearic Brits were to be granted a vote. How many would actually vote? How many would be interested? As there is no vote, there is little interest, and little interest would be about right. Were there a vote, then maybe that interest would be greater, though that is questionable. The local English-speaking media is faced by a similar conundrum. No vote for the Brits, so not much reporting of the issues. “The Bulletin” contains more about British politics than it ever does about national Spanish politics. There is nothing essentially wrong with this. It knows its audience, and its audience is more interested in Gordon Brown and David Cameron than Zapatero and Rajoy. Even in the week of the announcement of the election, “Euro Weekly” had not a single mention of it, despite the election having been announced on 14 January, three days before its 17 January publication date.
It comes back to commitment, or rather its almost inevitable absence. British expats live in Mallorca and Spain because they like the climate and the lifestyle and can easily maintain their connection to the old country. They do not live here because they want to vote for the PP or PSOE. The media reflects this. In the same issue of Euro Weekly, someone is praising the paper for printing British television listings that were not in the printed-in-Spain version of “The Daily Mail”. For many Brits, that is what it’s all about – sun, sea and Sky.
Spain and Spanish politics? Where’s the commitment?
QUIZ
Yesterday – The Kinks. Today’s title – ok, the film was known for having a record number of f-words, but which of their songs is also closely associated with Wilson Pickett?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
The editor of “The Bulletin” has bemoaned the fact that, being British, he is denied a vote. Letters to the paper dispute his entitlement, a point of the letter-writers being that there is a way to gain the vote, which is to “commit” to Spain and become a citizen. The editor responds by declaring that he is “European” and that, given freedom of movement within the European Union, the right to vote should come as part of that movement.
This is a loaded exchange. I shall try and keep it brief.
What does it mean to “commit” to Spain? Gaining citizenship may be a legalistic way of declaring this, but commitment goes way deeper. A national of one country has a psychological and sociological bond with the country of origin, one formed by family, culture and language. A change in citizenship does not necessarily change the way one “feels” or indeed the way one “is”. The commitment line of argument is largely specious, except in the case of second or later generations.
There are nearly 20,000 people from the UK registered in the Balearics. This past week, there were some figures released for the number of Spanish citizenships granted to people of different countries of origin. I wish I had now kept the paper in which these were published, but I can recall the figure for the UK was very low. The greatest number was for people from a country not in the EU – Morocco. I know only one British “expatriate” who for sure has Spanish citizenship. Maybe there are more, but one doesn’t as a rule interrogate friends or acquaintances as to their citizenship.
Insofar as a foreign national chooses to live in another country and contributes to its economy and pays its taxes (aspects linked to national politics), one might argue that there is a case for voting rights. But nations jealously guard their enfranchisements and active engagement with the political process. Even in the land of the free – the USA – a foreign-born politician cannot stand as President. Arnold Schwarzenegger could never go for the White House. There are limits to the extent that nations allow other nationals to affect their politics. The European Union is not a harmonised political entity, even if some might wish that it were. Free movement there may be, but national elections are still a matter for individual countries. In a country where immigration is a topic that exercises voters, one can well imagine the canción y baile amongst Spanish voters if foreigners were suddenly allowed to choose between Zapatero and Rajoy.
But the franchise does allow for non-Spaniards to vote, and that is at what currently passes for the level of centrality in EU democracy – the European Parliament. Free movement within Europe, freedom to vote for the institution that does represent Europe. The editor is European, he’s said as much, thus he has a vote. He is not Spanish, therefore he does not have a vote in the Spanish elections.
Let us assume though that those of voting age among these 20,000 Balearic Brits were to be granted a vote. How many would actually vote? How many would be interested? As there is no vote, there is little interest, and little interest would be about right. Were there a vote, then maybe that interest would be greater, though that is questionable. The local English-speaking media is faced by a similar conundrum. No vote for the Brits, so not much reporting of the issues. “The Bulletin” contains more about British politics than it ever does about national Spanish politics. There is nothing essentially wrong with this. It knows its audience, and its audience is more interested in Gordon Brown and David Cameron than Zapatero and Rajoy. Even in the week of the announcement of the election, “Euro Weekly” had not a single mention of it, despite the election having been announced on 14 January, three days before its 17 January publication date.
It comes back to commitment, or rather its almost inevitable absence. British expats live in Mallorca and Spain because they like the climate and the lifestyle and can easily maintain their connection to the old country. They do not live here because they want to vote for the PP or PSOE. The media reflects this. In the same issue of Euro Weekly, someone is praising the paper for printing British television listings that were not in the printed-in-Spain version of “The Daily Mail”. For many Brits, that is what it’s all about – sun, sea and Sky.
Spain and Spanish politics? Where’s the commitment?
QUIZ
Yesterday – The Kinks. Today’s title – ok, the film was known for having a record number of f-words, but which of their songs is also closely associated with Wilson Pickett?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Thanks, Mr. President
Spain will hold a general election on 9 March. I can already hear the presses being cranked up with the “Vota” posters.
There are two parties that matter in Spain – the PSOE (Partido Socialista Obrero Español) of the current ruling Zapatero administration and the PP (Partido Popular) headed by Mariano Rajoy. Left and right, well sort of. There is a third party, the smaller, communist-led United Left. In addition, there are innumerable other minor parties and groupings, among the more significant being regional parties in Catalonia and the Basque country.
The election promises to be close. At present, the PSOE holds a three percentage point lead in the polls, though Sr. Zapatero enjoys higher personal satisfaction ratings than his main opponent. It could be that the election comes down to this personal popularity.
Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero was launched into presidential office* by surprise, his included. On winning the 2004 election, not only did he look like Mr. Bean, his body language and demeanour were those of an awkward and shy person with a sheepish grin that suggested he was thinking “what the heck do I do now?”. Prior to the win, he had tried – unconvincingly – to do a Mr. Angry act in parliamentary exchanges. There was and is something endearing about him, like a bookish and meek schoolmaster attempting – generally unsuccessfully – to appear tough. Like Tony Blair, he once had the sobriquet “Bambi”. But politicians don’t rise to head political parties without there being some substance, unless that politician happens to be Iain Duncan Smith.
(* The position is President, though in the UK it is common to refer to the Spanish leader as Prime Minister.)
Zapatero is a sympathetic character. Rather like John Major, for any failings, there is a feeling that he is a decent enough bloke, and he has not been exposed with his pants down (or up) with a female member of government. Mariano Rajoy, on the other hand, attracts little in the way of sympathy, albeit that, in the aftermath of the defeat in 2004 when as Jose Maria Aznar’s anointed successor he stood to be the next president, he cut a sad and forlorn figure. And that’s just it with Sr. Rajoy. He looks sad, or is it miserable? Perhaps it’s something to do with the beard. Zapatero’s face can crack into a boyish and somewhat mischievous smile, but Rajoy just looks Mr. Grumpy.
Rajoy has done himself few favours with his absurd categorical rejection of climate change. Certitude in a leader may be an attribute, but not if it is plain wrong. The environment is unlikely to be one of the bigger issues in the election, even if the Government, via its coastal reclaim and demolition plan, has indicated the importance of environmental concerns. But it remains to be seen whether this is just political posturing in currying favour with the environmental lobby.
The election is likely to be fought on two major issues – the economy and terrorism. Spain’s economy has thrived under Zapatero (as it had done under Aznar), but the election’s timing is unfortunate for him. Uncertainty that has clouded the otherwise sunny economic sky is largely not of the Government’s doing nor necessarily within the Government’s control. The European Central Bank’s raising of interest rates was the first cloud, and inflation has stubbornly resisted this. The housing market is in a general downturn, and there is significant indebtedness within certain sectors of the economy – construction not least – and at the consumer level. The US-led credit squeeze was a double whammy on top of the ECB’s intervention.
Terrorism, it is claimed with justification, lost the PP the last election. Or, as importantly, the then Government’s reaction to terrorism lost the election. The Madrid bombings occurred three days before the 2004 election, and Aznar chose to finger the Basque terrorists ETA as the perpetrators. He was of course wrong.
Zapatero had appeared to be making headway with a solution to the Basque issue until ETA broke its truce last summer (which had been effectively ended anyway by the bombing of Madrid airport). The truce had, all along perhaps, been a camouflage for ETA to regroup, and ETA could yet influence the result of this year’s election. It has been argued that Zapatero’s withdrawal of troops from Iraq suggested that he was less than tough on terrorism, and it may (stress may) have triggered a green light to ETA to eventually resume its activities. No one can know for sure. It is a matter of record though that Zapatero opposed Spanish military action in Iraq and that he questioned the legality of the invasion. However, the troop withdrawal was as much a political move for domestic consumption as anything else, a rejection of Aznar’s elevation of Spain into the international arena in support of Bush and Blair, for which he (Aznar) was mercilessly mocked by the Spanish equivalent of “Spitting Image” as “Tony’s little friend” in the style that David Steel once was.
Whether one accepts or not a sort of terrorism-lite approach by Zapatero in any link between the Iraq troop withdrawal decision and subsequent ETA activity, there was a widely held feeling that the withdrawal was at least partly due to the threat of a further outrage by Al-Qaida. As a participant in the fall of Saddam, Spain placed itself in the sights of Bin Laden and his network of cronies (and succumbed to them in the form of the Madrid bombings).
Another issue that may play a part in the election is the Government’s relationship with the Catholic Church. There has been disquiet in conservative religious circles at certain policies such as those regarding same-sex marriages and abortion. But abortion remains subject to strict criteria in Spain, and recent police activity against clinics alleged to have flouted these criteria does not suggest a general softening of approach. The hold of the Catholic Church over the Spanish people is not nearly as strong as one might imagine. Less than 20% of the population attends church on a regular basis. Economic development of the past two decades has made Spain an altogether more secular society. The Church may still have a say, but its voice is heard by fewer and fewer.
Where the Balearics and Mallorca are concerned, the maintenance of a Socialist government in Madrid should be beneficial in that both the national and regional administrations will continue to be governed by leaders of the same party. Zapatero has indicated that more from the central coffers could be coming the Balearics’ way if he wins. Vota PSOE in the Balearics, vota more dosh. Maybe.
Personality counts for so much in current-day politics. Zapatero may not be a Felipe González, a flamboyant Socialist leader and arguably Spain’s pre-eminent post-Franco politician, but he is regarded with some affection. The economy may be the main battleground, but the fight between a likeable politician and a dour one may yet prove to be critical. Likeable versus dour. Now where have I heard that before?
QUIZ
Yesterday – Gene Vincent. Today’s title – no way indicative of my support or not let me point out, and no prizes for knowing Marilyn Monroe, so something easier as a follow-up to yesterday. Who sang “Sweet Gene Vincent”?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
There are two parties that matter in Spain – the PSOE (Partido Socialista Obrero Español) of the current ruling Zapatero administration and the PP (Partido Popular) headed by Mariano Rajoy. Left and right, well sort of. There is a third party, the smaller, communist-led United Left. In addition, there are innumerable other minor parties and groupings, among the more significant being regional parties in Catalonia and the Basque country.
The election promises to be close. At present, the PSOE holds a three percentage point lead in the polls, though Sr. Zapatero enjoys higher personal satisfaction ratings than his main opponent. It could be that the election comes down to this personal popularity.
Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero was launched into presidential office* by surprise, his included. On winning the 2004 election, not only did he look like Mr. Bean, his body language and demeanour were those of an awkward and shy person with a sheepish grin that suggested he was thinking “what the heck do I do now?”. Prior to the win, he had tried – unconvincingly – to do a Mr. Angry act in parliamentary exchanges. There was and is something endearing about him, like a bookish and meek schoolmaster attempting – generally unsuccessfully – to appear tough. Like Tony Blair, he once had the sobriquet “Bambi”. But politicians don’t rise to head political parties without there being some substance, unless that politician happens to be Iain Duncan Smith.
(* The position is President, though in the UK it is common to refer to the Spanish leader as Prime Minister.)
Zapatero is a sympathetic character. Rather like John Major, for any failings, there is a feeling that he is a decent enough bloke, and he has not been exposed with his pants down (or up) with a female member of government. Mariano Rajoy, on the other hand, attracts little in the way of sympathy, albeit that, in the aftermath of the defeat in 2004 when as Jose Maria Aznar’s anointed successor he stood to be the next president, he cut a sad and forlorn figure. And that’s just it with Sr. Rajoy. He looks sad, or is it miserable? Perhaps it’s something to do with the beard. Zapatero’s face can crack into a boyish and somewhat mischievous smile, but Rajoy just looks Mr. Grumpy.
Rajoy has done himself few favours with his absurd categorical rejection of climate change. Certitude in a leader may be an attribute, but not if it is plain wrong. The environment is unlikely to be one of the bigger issues in the election, even if the Government, via its coastal reclaim and demolition plan, has indicated the importance of environmental concerns. But it remains to be seen whether this is just political posturing in currying favour with the environmental lobby.
The election is likely to be fought on two major issues – the economy and terrorism. Spain’s economy has thrived under Zapatero (as it had done under Aznar), but the election’s timing is unfortunate for him. Uncertainty that has clouded the otherwise sunny economic sky is largely not of the Government’s doing nor necessarily within the Government’s control. The European Central Bank’s raising of interest rates was the first cloud, and inflation has stubbornly resisted this. The housing market is in a general downturn, and there is significant indebtedness within certain sectors of the economy – construction not least – and at the consumer level. The US-led credit squeeze was a double whammy on top of the ECB’s intervention.
Terrorism, it is claimed with justification, lost the PP the last election. Or, as importantly, the then Government’s reaction to terrorism lost the election. The Madrid bombings occurred three days before the 2004 election, and Aznar chose to finger the Basque terrorists ETA as the perpetrators. He was of course wrong.
Zapatero had appeared to be making headway with a solution to the Basque issue until ETA broke its truce last summer (which had been effectively ended anyway by the bombing of Madrid airport). The truce had, all along perhaps, been a camouflage for ETA to regroup, and ETA could yet influence the result of this year’s election. It has been argued that Zapatero’s withdrawal of troops from Iraq suggested that he was less than tough on terrorism, and it may (stress may) have triggered a green light to ETA to eventually resume its activities. No one can know for sure. It is a matter of record though that Zapatero opposed Spanish military action in Iraq and that he questioned the legality of the invasion. However, the troop withdrawal was as much a political move for domestic consumption as anything else, a rejection of Aznar’s elevation of Spain into the international arena in support of Bush and Blair, for which he (Aznar) was mercilessly mocked by the Spanish equivalent of “Spitting Image” as “Tony’s little friend” in the style that David Steel once was.
Whether one accepts or not a sort of terrorism-lite approach by Zapatero in any link between the Iraq troop withdrawal decision and subsequent ETA activity, there was a widely held feeling that the withdrawal was at least partly due to the threat of a further outrage by Al-Qaida. As a participant in the fall of Saddam, Spain placed itself in the sights of Bin Laden and his network of cronies (and succumbed to them in the form of the Madrid bombings).
Another issue that may play a part in the election is the Government’s relationship with the Catholic Church. There has been disquiet in conservative religious circles at certain policies such as those regarding same-sex marriages and abortion. But abortion remains subject to strict criteria in Spain, and recent police activity against clinics alleged to have flouted these criteria does not suggest a general softening of approach. The hold of the Catholic Church over the Spanish people is not nearly as strong as one might imagine. Less than 20% of the population attends church on a regular basis. Economic development of the past two decades has made Spain an altogether more secular society. The Church may still have a say, but its voice is heard by fewer and fewer.
Where the Balearics and Mallorca are concerned, the maintenance of a Socialist government in Madrid should be beneficial in that both the national and regional administrations will continue to be governed by leaders of the same party. Zapatero has indicated that more from the central coffers could be coming the Balearics’ way if he wins. Vota PSOE in the Balearics, vota more dosh. Maybe.
Personality counts for so much in current-day politics. Zapatero may not be a Felipe González, a flamboyant Socialist leader and arguably Spain’s pre-eminent post-Franco politician, but he is regarded with some affection. The economy may be the main battleground, but the fight between a likeable politician and a dour one may yet prove to be critical. Likeable versus dour. Now where have I heard that before?
QUIZ
Yesterday – Gene Vincent. Today’s title – no way indicative of my support or not let me point out, and no prizes for knowing Marilyn Monroe, so something easier as a follow-up to yesterday. Who sang “Sweet Gene Vincent”?
(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
