Half of the Archipelago is entrenched these days with the FDCAN and the arguments, for and against, one model or another of distribution. Fifteen days ago the fight was who was building the roads and who was not. And, waiting for the Carnivals to arrive, we have ahead of us a dizzying debate about who should stay in the Government and who should leave or be dismissed.
All of these seem like very sensible reasons to break up the Canary Islands. To raise barriers and promise insurmountable enmities for the rest of the century.
Can I contribute some more ideas?
In the press these days we find an amusing proposal from the ousted Government Delegate in the Canary Islands. It consists of the State Budgets for 2017 including two specific items for roads in the Canary Islands, with their names: the works on the La Aldea road (Gran Canaria) and the island ring road (Tenerife). Nominated financing that would also be extracted from the budgetary allocation foreseen for the Road Agreement with the entire Archipelago.
Fantastic. Don't you think?
Suddenly the Canary Islands must renounce their powers in roads. Forget the priorities and criteria established in the Road Agreement for years and assume that, if there are any reductions in the works, these amounts cannot be allocated to other projects in the Islands.
In short, the Government Delegation route provides a privileged shortcut for the two capital islands to ensure the financing of their works at the expense of the rest.
Do you remember the triple (double) parity? Do you now understand why it is essential?
The idea of the flag chaser (which was quickly seconded and even applauded by capital politicians of all colors) puts on the table a very revealing concept of the Canary Islands: outside of Tenerife and Gran Canaria there is only sea and several rocks.
Surely the works in Tenerife and Gran Canaria are a priority. Essential on their island. Very necessary for better mobility. I don't question it.
But aren't there any priority road works for the residents of Lanzarote, La Gomera, El Hierro, La Palma or Fuerteventura? Don't any of the new roads on these islands deserve equal treatment? Why can't the financing in the State Budgets for 2017 of the majorero road axis be nominated?, to give an example...
The week has been entertaining in arguments for the detachable Canary Islands.
The last Board of Directors of the Las Palmas Port Authority brought us another example.
We were dreaming of some glimpse of investment planning in the new La Hondura dock in Puerto del Rosario... Or at least a slight improvement in the berthing conditions in the current dock... And we find that what occupies the Port Authority is to act as an intermediate body to request a loan from Puertos del Estado, through the Port Land Accessibility Fund, to attack the burying of the Avenida Marítima in Las Palmas more quickly.
Again, fantastic! They have succeeded.
These are the arguments that give rise to demands such as that of the conejeras institutions for island management of the ports.
Where did the Port Authority's commitment to advance in the La Hondura project go? Don't they realize that with lampposts, sidewalks and promises of a beach in installments they no longer satisfy the majoreros? And hasn't it occurred to them to ask for that credit to dignify the maritime avenue of Puerto del Rosario and the fuel pipes along its entire front?
There are plenty of examples and in multiple areas.
Do you know that Red Eléctrica is sowing Fuerteventura with large electricity towers against the opinion of all the majoreras institutions? In Gran Canaria, the decision of the institutions on the regasification plant is assumed, but the majoreros have to live with the large electricity companies roaming freely through boards and gavias?
I don't know if it's just me, but I think that while the detachable Canary Islands advances with proposals of this type, the reaction is managing to better tie the ties of the real Canary Islands. The one of dialogue between islands as equals, without the need for the intermediation of capital navel-gazing. The one that defends parity in Parliament, no matter how many apocalyptic manifestos are spread from the capitals, fueled by their circles of power.
This awareness of the islands advances as a reaction to the proposals of those who promote the detachable Canary Islands.
*Mario Cabrera González, CC deputy for Fuerteventura.
