The modification of the Special Plan of La Geria has once again been left on the table in the plenary session that the Cabildo held this Thursday. Only the government group of the Canary Islands Coalition has been in favor of approving it. All the opposition groups, however, have spoken out against it, due to a legal doubt.
The first to raise this doubt has been the Socialist Party, which asked at the beginning of the debate why there were no reports from the Environment Department on this modification, but there were reports from the island director of Territorial Policy. The socialists doubted the powers of the island director to issue reports, given that he is an appointed official and not a civil servant, and have advocated leaving the modification on the table.
All the opposition groups have been adhering to this legal doubt and transferring the question to the secretary. He, for his part, referred to a report from the PIOT office that stated that the modification should be approved by an absolute majority (a doubt that arose when it was voted on for the last time, obtaining only a simple majority). The opposition, however, continued to harbor the same doubt about the report of the island director. "We do not want to incur criminal liability. There is no report from any technical official, is it necessary?", Astrid Pérez asked the secretary.
He then replied that he could not answer "in voce" in this regard, claiming that the law gives him a deadline for the "study" of certain issues. "I do not venture to issue an in voce report on something that I am not very clear about," he added. Nor did he do so in reference to another doubt of the president, who after Pérez's intervention asked him if he would incur "any criminal offense" with the approval. Faced with these answers, the opposition en bloc has decided to leave the modification on the table and the councilors of the Canary Islands Coalition have been left alone in the sense of their vote.
"The incompetence of the island director of Territorial Policy to report on the file, since he is a political position of free designation and not a civil servant of the Corporation, is sufficient reason for the withdrawal of the document from the Plenary," the socialist spokesperson later added through a statement.
"At forced marches"
In the course of the debate, other criticisms from the opposition have also surfaced. The socialist spokesperson, Rocío Arredondo, has made a "call for calm and moderation", showing herself against the modification being approved "in a hurry and running in the last plenary session" of the legislature and by a Corporation "practically in functions". Arredondo assures that the attitude of the president, "generates reasonable doubts about what interests he defends".
In the same vein, the councilor of Alternativa Ciudadana, Mary Paz Cabrera, has questioned the "why" of "so much insistence on approving it on the fly". Cabrera has shown special harshness in her interventions, pointing out that with this change in the Plan it is intended to "give legal coverage to a winery that is in judicial process", in reference to the Stratvs winery. "That is prevarication," said the AC councilor. "The eyes of the Court are on this modification," she warned.
San Ginés, for his part, has hastened to reply that it is "his obligation to denounce if he believes that a crime is being committed". "It is very good to say it for the gallery, but be consistent and denounce it," he added. "Do not worry, we are going to go to court, you do not have to invite us," she replied.
"We will support the primary sector"
The PP councilor has stressed that her party "will support the primary sector" and, therefore, has been in favor of the modification, although she has reiterated that she will not approve it without that clarification from the secretary. Astrid Pérez has also spoken about the legality of the wineries. The PP spokesperson has stated that "with the law in hand, the precautionary closure could be approved not of one or two wineries, but of several". "Who are those wineries going to sell the grapes to?", she asked afterwards, going so far as to say that she does not want to go "to sleep thinking that five or six wineries could be closed and what the 1,700 winegrowers and their families are going to live on".
For Pérez, those wineries "are already built and must be given legal coverage". "Let's not put obstacles in their way," she told the councilor of Alternativa. The PP councilor has even opined that it would be necessary to "ask for responsibilities from the politicians who allowed them to be built".
The PIL, for its part, has intervened in a similar line to that of the PP, assuring that they want to "help, but with all the guarantees of the law". Fabián Martín has reiterated on several occasions that his intention is to "support" the modification, "but supported by technical reports".
