The trip of the Lanzarote Island Council's Sports Counselor, Juan Monzón, to Kona, Hawaii, has provided the PSOE with a new reason to demand explanations from Oswaldo Betancort. The socialists question the duration of the trip, demand to know the institutional agenda, and request a breakdown of transportation, accommodation, and per diem expenses. The president must respond with documents, but the controversy raises another question that the opposition should not avoid: with what balance of their own management do they compare the expenses they are now denouncing?
Overseeing the government is an obligation of the opposition, not a concession. However, that work loses consistency when it focuses on the adversary's expenses and sidelines the accounts from the period when they held government responsibilities. The PSOE managed the Island Council for years and participated in a tourism promotion policy that mobilized millions of euros. That trajectory does not invalidate their criticisms, but it does require any comparison to be based on homogeneous data and not on a biased selection of figures.
The issue is not to justify a questioned trip by pointing to previous expenses, but to prevent transparency from becoming a one-way demand.
Hawaii: explanations must come with invoices
On October 15, 2026, the PSOE denounced that Juan Monzón had traveled to Kona for twelve days and questioned the necessity of his presence and the duration of his stay. The party requested to know the dates, the agenda, the members of the delegation, and the associated expenses. Their statements, however, do not, on their own, allow for the establishment of the final cost of the trip or the verification of which amounts were effectively paid with public funds.
The Island Council must publish the authorization, the work program, the invoices, the recognized per diems, the entities that funded each item, and a report of the results obtained. If the trip was part of a sports promotion strategy, it is necessary to demonstrate which activities were carried out, what commitments were made, and how much they cost.
Budgetary rules regulate compensation for service, but they do not prove that a specific amount has been paid or that the expense is sufficiently justified. This must be proven through the corresponding file.
The PSOE has the right to request that documentation. What it should not do is present the complaint as if it were enough to close the debate. If it wants the accounts of the current government to be examined, it must also accept that those of its period be reviewed with identical criteria.
Million-dollar budgets and pending comparisons
The general figures allow the debate to be contextualized, although they should not be confused with travel expenses. The Cabildo's budget for 2023, approved during the presidency of María Dolores Corujo, was around 170.3 million euros, while the consolidated budget was close to 239 million. Under the current government of CC and PP, the general budget amounted to 189.3 million in 2024 and 209.1 million in 2025. For 2026, the budgetary project reached 221.1 million, with a consolidated figure close to 289.7 million.
These are magnitudes that reflect the economic dimension of the institution, not amounts exclusively allocated to promotion, travel, or representation. Budgets finance services, investments, infrastructure, and other public policies. Nor do they necessarily equate to what was spent: to know the actual execution, one must consult the settlements and recognized obligations.
There is another essential caution. The change of government occurred in mid-2023, so it would not be rigorous to attribute all that was executed during that fiscal year to a single party. If the PSOE demands a global comparison, it must accept that it be carried out with defined periods, equivalent items, and verified payments. Selecting general figures to question the adversary does not substitute for that work.
External promotion was also a socialist priority
International tourism promotion did not begin with CC. In December 2021, during Corujo's term, the Lanzarote External Promotion Society (SPEL) approved a budget of 5,822,000 euros for 2022, presented at the time as the highest in its history. The Cabildo's planned contribution increased from 2.7 to 3.7 million euros, and a budget of 500,000 euros was allocated for the so-called Premium Strategy.
For 2023, SPEL approved projected revenues of 5,624,000 euros, of which four million corresponded to the Cabildo's planned contribution. Those accounts supported marketing actions, tourism product development, and Lanzarote's positioning in source markets.
The activity also included professional meetings and travel. At FITUR 2022, Corujo reported on nearly fifty meetings with airlines and tourism agents to strengthen connectivity and the sector's recovery. The promotional purpose may have been legitimate, but that legitimacy did not exempt the socialist government from justifying the resources used or evaluating its results.
In February 2024, with Oswaldo Betancort now at the head of the Cabildo, SPEL announced that its business volume during 2023 had exceeded ten million euros and that the insular contribution had increased from 4.5 million in 2022 to more than 6.5 million in 2023. This data comes from the entity itself and corresponds to a transition year: it does not allow automatically attributing the entire increase to CC or solely to the PSOE.
The difference between approved budgets, public contributions, income, and business volume is fundamental. Precisely for this reason, the PSOE should demand a comparable audit of the promotional items from both periods, instead of merely questioning the expenses affecting the current government.
The PSOE's complaints also need to be verified
In May 2025, the socialists stated that the insular government's travel and per diem expenses exceeded 110,000 euros during 2024. In October 2024, they also questioned an expense of over 80,000 euros linked to a gastronomic fair in Texas.
Both amounts must be attributed to the PSOE until they are verified with complete settlements or an independent audit. In the case of Texas, moreover, it is necessary to separate the cost of the fair from that of the travel expenses of public officials. Without this breakdown, there is a risk of presenting distinct concepts as a single item.
The opposition can and should ask what was contracted, who paid, what benefits were obtained, and what promotional results were achieved. But the demand for rigor must be reciprocal. It is not enough to put a figure on the table: its origin must be explained, what it includes must be specified, and documentation that allows its verification must be provided.
The PSOE cannot turn a partial complaint into an accounting conclusion. Nor should it settle for demanding explanations from CC without promoting a review of the promotional and travel expenses incurred when it was in government.
Promotion, sponsorship, and per diems are not the same
The debate requires distinguishing items that respond to different purposes. SPEL's budget is not equivalent to public officials' travel expenses; an advertising campaign is not a diet, and a sponsorship contract cannot be automatically added to the cost of a trip.
In the current stage, promotion contracts have been published, including one for 450,000 euros related to the Lanzarote International Cup, in which SPEL and the Centers of Art, Culture, and Tourism participate. To assess that agreement, the contribution of each entity, the payments made, and the agreed-upon counter-performances must be verified. It would not be rigorous to attribute its full amount to a single entity or add it to other items without ruling out overlaps.
To compare the two stages, a homogeneous annual report is needed that includes transfers to SPEL, the definitive and executed budget, advertising and sponsorship contracts, expenses for fairs and events, and the amounts actually paid for travel and per diems. Without this inventory, there is no sufficient basis to state how much each government globally spent on external promotion and travel.
The absence of a comparable figure does not absolve the current government, but it also does not allow accusations that have not yet been verified to be considered proven. Accounting must be above partisan convenience, especially when it comes to public money.
Transparency cannot have two different standards
The trip to Hawaii must be clarified. CC has the obligation to explain its purpose, publish the cost, and demonstrate the results. If the promotional activity was useful, the documents should allow it to be verified; if the expense was not sufficiently justified, the public should also be able to know.
But the PSOE should accept that demanding accountability implies accepting that one's own actions are reviewed. During their time at the head of the Cabildo, external promotion budgets were also approved, campaigns were financed, and activities outside of Lanzarote were developed. Recalling this does not invalidate their accusations: it requires criticism to be coherent and comparisons to be based on homogeneous figures.
The Cabildo could publish a record of each official trip with the authorization, the agenda, the participants, the itemized cost, the allowances paid, the funding entity, and the results. Promotion contracts should include the awarded and paid amount, the considerations, and an execution report. SPEL's accounts would have to allow tracking the destination of public contributions.
The PSOE can demand such transparency, but it should also promote it for all the exercises of its time in government. And CC cannot hide behind the previous management to evade the explanations that correspond to it today.
Public money does not belong to any party. Hawaii can represent an opportunity to promote Lanzarote, but that utility must be demonstrated with facts. The socialist complaint can open a necessary debate, although it does not replace the obligation to verify the figures nor does it turn the previous management into an area exempt from examination.
The decisive question is not which party denounces more forcefully, but what each administration did with public resources, how much it actually spent, and what it obtained in return. If the PSOE wants to demand accountability, it must also be willing to provide it.
Add La Voz de Lanzarote as a preferred Google source.
Stay informed with the latest current news.