The Action Plan for Democracy, approved this Tuesday by the Council of Ministers, is a catalogue of thirty measures, which includes legal reforms for which the Government has given itself a period of three years, the remainder of the legislature. The partners receive it with skepticism, as if the mountain had given birth to a mouse, which also, according to what they agree in Catalonia and the Basque Country, “is stillborn because there will not be the necessary consensus to get anything done.” The music that was heard yesterday in the ranks of PNV and Junts was quite similar: “We are facing another kick forward to entertain us all without any guarantee of having the support to do anything.”
Neither the Basque nor the Catalan partners believe that the plan presented by the Government goes beyond what can be accommodated in the political and media agenda. By the way, most of the measures included do not affect the Government but rather the media. The PNV recalled yesterday that the project includes proposals that the PSOE has been promising its partners for years, such as updating the law on official secrets or reforming the crimes of insulting state institutions: “We have no reason to think that if they have not done it before, they will go ahead with it now.”
While in the PNV and in Junts, as well as in ERC, what prevails is disbelief, on the left, Podemos warns, in its first move, that the project does not meet its demands because it falls short in putting pressure on privately owned media and also in other reforms that they do have on the legislative agenda.
It is worth noting in the list of measures announced that the European regulation, which the Government uses as a justification for presenting this regeneration plan, does not include the point that includes the mandatory safeguards that must be established to protect public media to prevent them from being used “for political purposes.” The European law that came into force in May establishes that, in relation to public media, the countries of the Union must establish by law the criteria for the appointment and dismissal of their senior officials, as well as the duration of their mandates, which must be sufficiently long and with sufficient funding to fulfil their mission.
Pedro Sánchez’s Action Plan for Democracy does apply the creation of a media registry, control of institutional advertising, and limiting professional secrecy and freedom of information.
The first response of the PP, through its spokesman in Congress, Miguel Tellado, was to announce its rejection of measures that Génova disassociates from the EU regulations that the Government is using to defend them.
“The Government should not try to take advantage of the adaptation of European regulations to sneak in through the back door any element that goes against the very principles that Europe defends.” The Popular Party voted in favour of the regulation approved by the European Parliament.
Tellado insisted on linking this plan with the investigation into the president’s “government, party and family.” “If there is a mud machine that must be fought against, it is precisely the one that Pedro Sánchez is handling.”
The four Podemos MPs also threatened to vote against the bill if the government does not include measures such as requiring presenters of current affairs programmes and media managers to make public their financial interests, just as public officials do.
The Government’s project requires a parliamentary debate and the processing of reforms for which it cannot count on the support of its partners. Yolanda Díaz’s weakness leaves Podemos open to the challenge, and the text has not been subject to prior consultation with either the Basque nationalists or the pro-independence partners. This means reiterating a legislative management model that has little chance of succeeding in Congress, although the Government can use it to try to blame others for the measures not being approved. It is the same tactic that they are considering with regard to the General State Budget (PGE) for next year.
The catalogue also includes very vague measures such as avoiding oligopolies. “Review the regulatory framework to guarantee pluralism and avoid concentration of the media.” Or the new reform of the articles of the Penal Code that limit freedom of expression, such as those referring to state institutions, religious feelings or public ridicule – leaving out crimes against the Crown.
The text mixes proposals that have been on the agenda for regenerative reform for years, by governments of one colour or another, without having been implemented, such as the obligation to establish electoral debates, to hold the annual debate on the state of the nation, to regulate “lobbies” or to reinforce sanctions for political parties that present their accounts in an inadequate manner.
But none of these measures are concrete, beyond a generic statement that has not even been agreed with the partners. The dominant impression in the parliamentary arch is that the Government has “pulled” the list of its failures with its partners – nationalists, independentists and leftists – to show them the carrot and make it seem like the ball is still moving on the field of play. Although, as the spokesman of one of the parties of the investiture majority says, “there is no chance of scoring a goal.”