Canal Gestión Lanzarote rejects the termination of the contract for the integral water cycle of the island initiated by the Water Consortium, which accuses the concessionaire of "serious breaches" in investments and holds it responsible for the constant cuts in supply.
In 171 pages of allegations to which La Voz has had access, the subsidiary of Canal Isabel II of Madrid describes the Cabildo's legal report as "unfounded and twisted" and questions whether it is its responsibility that more than 51% of desalinated water is lost in the network, as stated by the Consortium.
In this regard, it points out as "disproportionate" the decision to terminate the contract and asks if the Consortium is trying to "hide or overcome the multiple breaches" in investments. "The party that has not fulfilled what it is responsible for and is required to do, cannot expect the other to fulfill theirs," the company emphasizes.
Accuses the Consortium of lack of execution of investments
Canal assures that the accusations of "breach" in the provision of the service "lack foundation" and defends that the problems in the supply originate in alleged "lack of execution" of investments by the Consortium.
In addition, it states that "an obsolete, inefficient and insufficient infrastructure system has been kept in operation." The company alleges that the Consortium used the money from the fees to pay Inalsa's debt and that "in no case could or wanted to dispose of said amount to face essential works."
The subsidiary adds that the public company did not include in the contract specifications "in a detailed and individualized manner" the works that should be executed. In addition, it accuses the public body of an "absolute lack of investment" in its hydraulic infrastructures.
In this regard, it maintains that it has not breached the specifications, because the president of the Water Consortium of Lanzarote in 2013, Pedro San Ginés, agreed with the company that the company's offer would prevail over what was required in the specifications.
Likewise, Canal Gestión adds that the Consortium "cannot initiate" the end of the contract, because, according to its version, it "has never formally communicated" the detected faults, nor has it informed it of the need to correct some deficiencies. In addition, it accuses the body of "breaching its own procedure" to resolve the contract. While, given the possibility of initiating a new contract if the previous one is terminated, it warns that it will carry out "the appropriate legal actions."
At the same time, Pedro San Ginés, as president of the Cabildo of Lanzarote, rejected a proposal from Podemos to carry out "an exhaustive audit" of the works carried out by Canal from 2013 to 2018. Thus, he assured that there was already a commission, endowed with 200,000 euros, to audit it. "The president justified that there was already the Commission in charge of that work, however, as we can see, it was not operational, accumulating investment files of lots and lots without reviewing," Canal points out.
In this regard, Canal Gestión defends that it should have been the public institution that should supervise these works and that no one came to receive them. Likewise, it assures that it executed 209 investments, worth 61.3 million euros. To which it adds that "the verification work" of those investments was carried out between "seven/ten years after the bulk of the works were completed", that is, during the socialist mandate and that "greatly hinders carrying out any type of verification."
Estimates losses due to the tariff increase at more than 30 million
Canal Gestión won a legal battle against the Water Consortium for the increase in water tariffs. The institution had rejected the revision, relying on the continuous supply cuts. However, a court of contentious matters ratified in a final judgment the right of the concessionaire to raise prices from the fourth year of the contract, that is, from the year 2017. In total, Canal estimates the losses due to the non-increase of tariffs at more than 30 million euros.
This process has been described by Canal as "a real judicial pilgrimage" and defends that it still maintains the prices of 2011, despite the increase in the price of energy and what was agreed by contract. So it denounces that the Consortium ignores "its contractual commitments" and breaches the judicial resolutions.
Finally, it defends that the contract cannot be terminated due to the possible breaches of Canal because the Consortium has not complied with the tariff increase and would have breached "systematically, consciously and voluntarily" the necessary investments.
