It is as true that I read the comments of the digital media, as I am aware that a part of the opinions that are published come from people close to political parties.
Although it is not strictly a public debate, I appreciate some of the contributions, criticisms or 'trips' that some commentators dedicate to us, no matter how much others go overboard, without contributing anything to the common good.
And I do so, because it is part of current communication and, in addition, because these comments include requests such as those of a certain "Javier", who signs the following opinion on the controversy of the urban skeletons of Costa Teguise:
"Marcos, you have many possibilities to be the next mayor of Teguise. Tell us citizens what you would do in this case. Speak and propose solutions as a government, not as an opposition, because in May 2023 you are going to find this mess and the citizens of Teguise need to know and we want the solution you propose today to be the same when you are mayor. Oh, and we don't want to pay for the demolitions out of our own pockets."
Javier: You are right! It is time to take a stand, to explain what we would do if we obtain the majority confidence of the citizens of Teguise in the next elections. It is, without a doubt, our obligation to conquer tomorrow the right to lead the future of the municipality; and our duty, today, as the main opposition party.
I will tell "Javier" -and "one who votes for you", "teguiseño" or "neighbor of Costa"- that it is a priority to solve the bad image, and worse example for those who comply with the rules, of the current urban skeletons. Therefore, our unwavering commitment is that they are part of the political agenda, from the opposition -hence our initiatives in this regard-, and of course from the government, where we aspire to be, to do more in this and other matters.
Yes, without occurrences or false promises, such as those of the current government, with more than a decade of failed announcements: be it 'paint and color' contests to hide the deplorable photo of the skeletons; be it declarations of imminent construction of a hotel on these structures; be it, when not, magical solutions that do not arrive. Neither one, nor the other, nor anything beyond.
It is therefore urgent to abandon constant announcements or alibis that, like the story of the shepherd and the sheep, end up not being believed by almost anyone. In response to "one who votes for you": we are not going to trivialize or play with this issue. The first thing, which is what the opaque government of Oswaldo Betancort has not done, is to inform in detail about the state of each skeleton: if there is a demolition order, if the owner is willing to do so, if we already have a demolition project, if the judge requires any action in this regard, etcetera. What we will do, with light and stenographers, involving public opinion and all parties, as they all represent the citizens, even more so in a matter of this importance.
Do you know why, "neighbor of Costa"? Because everyone has the right to know how things are, including the warnings from the courts to the mayor for his passivity with the demolition orders for annulled construction licenses, especially when most were granted "knowing of their illegality", in times not so far away.
And do not fear, "teguiseño", that if demolition is necessary, its cost will be borne by the owner, voluntarily or, otherwise, he will be billed. Remember: the plots where the skeletons sit may be liable for the debts incurred, should the City Council do what corresponded to the owner.
Therefore, there are no excuses about how supposedly expensive it would be for the municipal treasury to execute the judgments and comply with the law, when what is really abusive is the current image, the social problem of occupation of the skeletons or the loss of competitiveness of the economic and residential engine that is Costa Teguise.
Thus, radical transparency, participation of all parties, respect for the law and commitment that any other formula to end the skeletons requires compensating the public interest for the damage caused, without tailor-made suits or pathological opacity.
And yes, you are right "Javier", it was time to explain it.
