“Autonomy by dragging”

This is how it has been. We have seen it happen to the Valencia Statute and the Andalusian one, which was approved the day before yesterday in a public referendum. Albeit with a very low turnout.

I will not dwell on the causes of the low voter participation. Surprisingly low if one takes into account that –contrary to what happened in Catalonia, where a certain degree of abstention was inevitable – the Statute of Andalusia was negotiated and approved with the clear and categorical support of nearly all the Andalusian political parties. Neither will I give my opinion on Rodríguez Zapatero’s territorial policy, from the issue of ETA and the Basque Country to his attitude towards Catalonia, to the proliferation of statutory amendments that all this caused. Clearly, from the standpoint of Catalonia, the judgement would not be favourable, and it seems that in Andalusia it would not be overly enthusiastic either. In short, there has been excessive and frivolous political manoeuvring.

When over the last two or three years, as a result of the debate surrounding the Catalan Statute, a number of Spanish autonomous communities were asked what kind of statute they wanted, namely, what powers, what symbols, what financing system, their reply was always: “Nothing less than what Catalonia has”, or even simply: “No discrimination”. The Statute of Valencia even has a clause that says that it may obtain any power that it does not have and that another autonomous community has already obtained. Everyone knows this clause was added with Catalonia in mind. This is a constant obstacle for Catalonia. And it is an excellent excuse for the government to refuse all manner of requests for autonomy. These, more than improvements in themselves, are often simply requests for greater responsibility and more freedom to take initiatives. Which, very often, is what the other communities do not want. Certain communities did not even want responsibility for health or education, or, naturally, prisons. Neither did they seek fiscal co-responsibility. Nor policing powers. Initially they did not want international projection either. Plus, a long list of etceteras.

Indeed, without Catalonia’s demands for a new Statute no one would have moved a finger. Afterwards, a succession of “the same as them” requests arrived. This has led to a commotion throughout Spain, in parallel with the rift between the PSOE and the PP, which has resulted in an openly hostile attitude towards Catalonia. Unfortunately, the fear that the timing and the way in which the new Statute was presented would give rise to tension was confirmed, as well as the prediction, contrary to what many high-level officials in the Catalan tripartite government said, that the new Statute would not lead to an asymmetrical form of federalism, but to a  –let us say– federalism that is more symmetrical than ever.

This is how it has always been. It was thus with the Mancomunitat. Today it is opportune to recall that in 1919, the “Manifiesto de Córdoba” called for “a sovereignty of equal intensity as that requested by the Catalan Mancomunidad”. One other example of this was the recommendation made by José Calvo Sotelo, towards the end of Primo de Rivera’s dictatorship, that a “representation of Valencia’s driving forces” calls for the establishment of the Valencian Mancomunitat. And this he justified by saying that “the wounding fact of the differential Catalan reality, represented administratively by its Mancomunidad, would significantly be weakened if instead of constituting an exception it established jurisprudence and became general law”. The fact is, like Andalusia, Valencia’s request for a Mancomunitat had never been the focus of a consistent revendication.

Whatever the case, we should conclude that Catalonia will never allow her autonomic development to be influenced by the degree of autonomy given to other autonomous communities. Had we done so, as we already mentioned, we would not have fiscal co-responsibility –with the significant improvements in financing it has brought us from 1993 onwards–, or the Catalan police force, or control over roads, or penitentiary powers, or the tools for international projection, or the autonomous radio and television company, etc. And had it been up to the central government – that of the PSOE–, in 1983, we would have a second rate TV3, with the excuse that if they gave us a good television network, they would have to give everyone else one. We need to decide for ourselves what we want to be and what we need in order to move our project for a country and a society forward. And we must act in accordance with our vocation for self-government, which does not coincide with that of many Spanish autonomous communities. Ours is more ambitious because it responds to a differential reality that is established and affirmed through self-government.

Following behind, and taking the same path initiated by Catalonia, there are autonomous communities that have subsequently called for and obtained what they never thought to ask for. This is an obstacle for Catalonia, but with or without it, we must act in accordance with our own priorities. And have the resolve to defend them here and in Madrid.