By C. S. G.
He arrives at the bar for the arranged interview with a newspaper in one hand and a cigarette in the other, with which he also grabs an ashtray from the next table before sitting down at the one we are waiting for him at. The waitress brings him a coffee without even giving him time to order it. He fills the ashtray that was empty and that after exactly 50 minutes of the interview, he will leave with twelve butts of his black cigarettes, although all extinguished shortly after the halfway point. The "father" of the Moratorium, the island icon of growth containment, the socialist Enrique Pérez Parrilla, with his 58 years of age almost recently completed, is away from the active exercise of politics but continues to take the pulse of Lanzarote, and in that framework, he makes clear his great concern about the current situation. He believes that the businessmen who are betting on breaking that containment model are taking advantage of a moment of social and political "weakness" to "do their thing", although he also criticizes some members of his own party, for certain attitudes towards the PTE, but also for how they are leading socialism on the island. In short, he regrets that the Lanzarote PSOE is not being led with all the strength and efficiency it should to take advantage of an opportunity that he considers ideal for the upcoming elections. The present also involves another issue, the historic ruling in favor of the Cabildo for the unfair distribution of the REF. We'll start there.
- How did you receive the news of the court ruling that gives the Cabildo the reason and forces the Government of the Canary Islands to pay it about 20 million euros for an unfair distribution of the REF funds, thanks to an appeal promoted when you were president?
- I think it is magnificent news, fundamentally because it covers an issue that was evident, and it is a satisfaction to see that the Courts have given Lanzarote the reason. At that time there were also political issues involved. Having some trouble, for example, with the Cabildo of Gran Canaria was problematic for the Government of the Canary Islands, while the island of Lanzarote was politically in another situation. I think it is good that this corrective has been applied, even more so if, as it seems, the ruling 'gives wood' even in the considerations that the Canarian Government has made.
- Do you think that political responsibilities should also be demanded from the then authorities of the Government of the Canary Islands, some of whom are still there, since the current president was then Minister of Finance?
- It's very difficult. The fact that the Government is condemned is enough. Political demands are more complicated, because it was three or four years ago, and it was not this government, although it is true that the person responsible, in quotation marks, for this situation was Adán Martín.
- Changing the subject, what are you going to do in the next elections; are you going to run as a candidate?
- I have no plans for the elections. For the next course, well, I will have to go back to teaching. I am not considering running for elections.
- Not even if the party asks you to?
- Well, it will depend on whether the party asks me seriously, who asks me, how they ask me, but in principle it is not within my aspirations, and I don't think it is within the party's either. As far as I am concerned, because there are things within the party that I do not agree with, and with some decisions that were made at the time.
- Are you referring to the so-called renewal process of the PSOE of Lanzarote?
- Yes, to that so-called renewal process and other things. But it doesn't matter that I'm not on the lists. If they consider that things are going better that way, then it will go better.
- That so-called renewal process of the PSOE of Lanzarote has been going on for three years now. How do you see it?
- I see it badly. It seems to me that values within the party were dispensed with, not in my case but in others. I believe that the party at this time has a great opportunity, because Zapatero is governing in the Nation and a series of other reasons, and it has to be strong, prepared and equipped to try to win the elections. And I don't know if the party is very united now. I know that many people have been dispensed with.
- So you don't see the PSOE of Lanzarote with all the necessary strength to take advantage of this good opportunity that you say is presented to it?
- I would say that it should improve a lot. It has a golden opportunity, and it has to take advantage of it.
- What assessment do you make of Manuel Fajardo's performance as general secretary of the PSOE in Lanzarote?
- I prefer not to, because the assessments I can make of that type, I will make within my party.
- Who is now in the eye of the hurricane is Carlos Espino, as Councilor for Territorial Policy of the Cabildo...
- Yes, and it is a difficult position. I am not saying that he has not made some mistake in the form, it is possible that he has. There are people who have felt displaced in this process in social movements, etcetera, but of course it seems to me that it is being unfair to accuse him now of one thing and another, as if he were guilty of nothing. He has tried to move the Territorial Plan forward, and it gives me the impression that now, those people who look so much at the forms, what they are trying to do is to wear him down in the face of the next elections, because he is obviously a good candidate for a party. And behind it there are many interests, not always noble.
- Do you believe, however, that Carlos Espino should have acted with a little more transparency in this PTE process?
- It is possible that yes, that he has not been able or has not been able or the others have not wanted to seek complicity in certain sectors of society that are strong and necessary to be pushing behind. Those who are against the PTE are always going to be against it, but there are sectors that are in favor of the model of rational growth of the island, and those people have to be kept happy, united and in the same direction, even if they do not coincide 100 percent.
- But there are people even within his own party, the PSOE, who have confronted this PTE, such as the mayor of Tías...
- Yes, and I think it is nonsense from the mayor of Tías, because he mixes churras with merinas. The aspirations that the mayor of Tías has seem very reasonable to me from the point of view of what a mayor is, but the interests of the island are above any kind of consideration. Because of those statements by the mayor of Tías and perhaps because the day-to-day has not been well carried out or whatever, there is at this time a certain bewilderment in the forces called to support this.
- Do you think that the current Government pact of the Cabildo will last until the end of the Legislature?
- It should hold, but not at all costs. I hope that the Socialist Party will comply with the commitments, and approving the PTE is one of the fundamental commitments that must be fulfilled, and that if it is not fulfilled, it would be a matter of considering whether or not to continue the pact and the party should consider it. In any case, it is not convenient for the island, after what has been the first part of the Legislature, with a lot of presidents, to go back to the old ways.
- But do you think that, if that extreme is reached, more can be achieved in terms of the PTE and containment of growth by breaking the current government pact than by continuing the battle from within?
- That's what I don't know. I don't live the day to day, but you can't give up the PTE, and it must be done now, before the proximity of the elections makes the situation even more strange.
- In any case, in relation to the pact, you can reach that extreme, according to you, that the PSOE breaks the pact, but what can the party do in cases like that of its mayor of Tías?
- I don't know. The PSOE will have to solve it. I think that the mayor of Tías has to be convinced to enter a process of rationality, to leave his proposals for another occasion and do it through the front door, and not now in the middle of a negotiation in which something else is being discussed. The attitude of the mayor of Tías hurts the party. Tías has been in the line of support for the development model, but has previously had somewhat frivolous attitudes, and this is one of them. I don't think it's good for the party, because now what is said is "if even you yourselves don't agree", and the other mayors say "if even the mayor of Tías is in favor of what we say", and that weakens the position we should have on this issue.
- Regarding the draft electoral reform law, what do you think of the fact that the PSOE of Lanzarote has decided to silence its opposition to breaking the triple parity, following directives from the party?
- I think that mistakes have also been made there. Whether this should have led to the resignation of so-and-so or not, should not be talked about; the position that is considered reasonable should be defended...
- Are you referring to the threat of resignation of the general secretary of the PSOE in Lanzarote, Manuel Fajardo?
- Of course, because that was a consequence of political inexperience. You have to defend what you think is convenient and put in a balance whether you contribute more in one way or another, and that's it. The threat of resignation was a bad thing. Afterwards, accepting what the majority of the PSOE decides seems reasonable to me, because one is there for the good and for the bad. I consider that it is a mistake to break the triple parity, and I understand the position of the general secretary, because it would have been mine, but another thing is that I would have announced resignations.
- Speaking of other parties, were you surprised by the process that the PIL experienced and that ended with its division?
- I was not too surprised because the tensions that existed in the PIL had been talked about for a long time. It was something that was going to happen because it was a party created around a charismatic figure, with many votes, but as usually happens when the figure falls for whatever reason, a large part of the people who have been in his shadow, when he contributed votes said one thing, and now they say another. That serves them to look for a place under the sun in other lists, and I am surprised that there are people who are in politics almost professionally and who are in a party like someone who is in a football team: now I sign for this one, now for the other. I don't know if they are not defending any idea, or if they don't have one. It leaves much to be desired and sometimes you see that kind of thing with sadness. I will never be a person who defends the leader of the PIL, I believe that over the years he has not been a person that this island has benefited, but I am surprised that people who have been with him until the other day, now realize and say things about that leader who is the one who has put them where they are.
- Returning to the PTE, why do you believe that the current debate around this Plan has originated?
- I think it is a false debate, in all aspects, because what is really being debated is the growth model. It is disguised with issues of whether complementary offer yes, complementary offer no, but the Territorial Plan is something that has to be approved as soon as possible. The complementary offer, there will be time to discuss it at length. In the background, what there is is pressure so that the PTE does not come out. I contemplate with some concern that what happens on other occasions is happening again, the non-unity of action of the forces called to support and contain growth. Due to problems of distrust, due to electoral issues, the truth is that there is no unity or clear support towards a position that should be more forceful. A series of strange distrusts are noticeable again, which what they do is help those who do not want growth to be contained, and in that sense in some way it is coinciding with the intention of many businessmen of this island who have always been against moratoriums and containment of growth. The Territorial Plan must be approved now, urgently, because it is the spirit of what the Guidelines law said, and we have to realize that we are wasting time for many years. .
- But this political debate that you consider false, do you think it is promoted only by those businessmen whom you accuse of not wanting growth to be contained?
- Of course, because this containment model that has been bet on in the island does not interest a lot of people, who want to occupy new rustic land or end this model. And this entails the great danger of becoming a commonplace and massive destination, and that is the great danger that we currently have.
- Therefore, you consider that the Special Territorial Plan should be approved as it is, without including the complementary leisure offer for the entire island...
- Yes, because first because I consider that that is the spirit that a Territorial Plan should have, and then, because that complementary offer that is made, will have to be done thoughtfully, and that would take a long time, and what it would do is prevent the PTE from being approved. And despite what is said out there, some declassifications that have been approved in the Council of the Biosphere Reserve and the Cabildo, are in danger, because that is not all consolidated. And the law indicates that it should already be approved. In 2003 this was already for the initial approval, and it has not been done yet. Three years have been lost when the island has to continue advancing in terms of growth containment instruments.
- And to what do you think this stagnation of three years to which you refer in terms of the approval of new legal instruments for growth containment is due?
- Well, it seems that there is less mobilization of society and greater pressure from the interests that have always been behind to end this model. And in the middle of this appear what seems to be there now, a series of blackmail about I want this, I want that. It is not about seeing what each one wants and adding it up, but seeing the island as a whole and seeing where it should go. The problem is that it is politically incorrect to say that growth containment is nonsense. Many people think that, but no one dares to say it. One listens to them talking and they seem to be defenders of growth containment, and then when they can, they skip any consideration. Excuses are always sought to go against the model, because they are not able to say it openly, but they try to play openly to undermine and put pebbles more than to face directly, because they know that the population of the island, mostly is in favor of containment.
- Are you afraid that the PTE will be blocked in the middle of this debate?
- Yes, and I think that is what some intend, with which we will have lost another year, and a complete legislature.
- About that other discussion about the complementary leisure offer, do you have a concrete opinion about how many golf courses and how many marinas the island should have?
- I think there are already enough. With the one in Costa Teguise and the ones that are underway, in Tías and Yaiza, that's fine. It seems absurd to try to make Lanzarote a golf destination. As for marinas, I also consider that it is fine with what there is.
- What provisional balance do you make of the Moratorium four years before it comes to an end?
- I think they have put quite a few pebbles on it. In any case, fortunately the Courts are giving the Cabildo the reason. There are a series of lawsuits that should start to take effect now, to fill with fear some who have thought that the law could be skipped. I think that badly or well, with the moratorium things have been achieved. Has everything that was wanted been achieved? Of course not, but the bases have been opposed and I think that globally it has been positive, and we will continue to see the consequences of those lawsuits from now on.
- What do you think of agreements such as Algol's and Yudaya's?
- Negotiating seems good to me, it will always be essential, but it must be done with light and stenographer, so that distrust is not generated. In the case of Algol, it clearly gives me the feeling that there has been an attempt to confuse between what the City Council of Teguise intends and possible negotiations that the Cabildo recommended in its day. From there to what seems to be signed, there is quite a distance, because this agreement does not seem to be good for the island. In the case of Yudaya, I think it is more in line with a transaction that can be positive for the containment position, in the sense that apparently, there is no increase in beds. And there are other sites where lawsuits have not been won and there will also have to be negotiations, but all within a certain philosophy.
- Many wonder if any hotel built skipping the law will ever be demolished. Do you think that we should reach that extreme?
- I think so. If they are legalizable, they can be legalized, but it would not be bad if one was demolished, for the purpose of serving as a warning, although I do not dare to say which one yes and which one no. I feel more sorry that the house of a settler is demolished, and they have been demolished, than the demolition of a hotel made by a businessman who lives on that, knowing that he was doing it outside the law.
