The president of the Government, Pedro Sánchez, has a pretty clear idea of the process that should be followed to adapt the text of the Constitution to the new needs of Spanish society. Not intended as a negotiating huge, its controversial aspects, but to open a way more straightforward and pragmatic for which they will be improving those points that conciten a consensus is almost unanimous. The ultimate goal would be the Constitution of 1978, but with all those modifications necessary for the young people of today feel as yours. To the president Sanchez the covenant constitutional form part of a social compact more spacious, in which the territorial aspects are fundamental but, since then, only a part of the alliance between generations. The conversation took place in the palacio de La Moncloa on the 20th of November, on the occasion of the special supplement of the Constitution, which is gonna be released this Thursday alongside the print edition.
MORE INFORMATION
A look at the future of two presidents and opposing necessary Reforms versus a consensus impossible
Question. When they approved the Constitution, how old were you?
Response. I was born in 72.
Q. Someone who was 6 years old when it passed the Constitution and is now president of the Government, do you think that your text still fits to the reality, or that there are that give you an “interpretation ” evolutionary”, as he said in his day the Constitutional Court?
A. I’ll summarize in one sentence, which at best is a truism, but it seems to me illustrative of the need for the Constitution to adapt to the society that it serves, and is the Spain 2018 is not the Spain of 1978. There are also other considerations. The first, in historical terms, is that I believe that the Constitution of the 78 assumes the legacy of the Second Republic, their failure, of the Civil War and later the franco dictatorship. It does in that it suggests that in our country there will never be democracy if people do not recognize the territorial diversity and vice versa; that is to say, there will never be territorial diversity if we are not within a democratic system. The second is that the Constitution allowed us to homologarnos with the democracies of europe and in consequence we were able to enter the EU. When we speak of the evolution of the Spanish Constitution, we have to look to Europe: at any given time, this generation of leaders that we represent now the same to different parties in different areas (in Government or in the opposition) we need to strengthen our ties with the European Union, and promote the process of evolution of our Constitution to serve for that purpose. Serve to strengthen the very process of the European Union, and to develop our contribution to that construction, to strengthen the solidarity, not only in terms of citizenship, but also territorial, and to improve the structure of governance of Spain.
“federalism, as such, is a term which is not just to be understood by the part of the spaniards”
Q. One of the big issues that always arise on the evolution of the Spanish Constitution is its amendment to secure a federal structure of the State. How do you see?
A. I would say three things: first, I like very much a sentence of Jordi Solé Tura said, “it doesn’t matter how you call it, the important thing is that it works”. I think that pragmatic, coming also from a person who was an exile, she returned and eventually ended up being minister of Culture is a good conception of the political life: to have principles and be pragmatic. In the second place, the problem is that federalism as such is a term that is not just to be understood by the spaniards. The meaning it has in Spain has nothing to do with the meaning it has in other democracies. Federalism in Spain, I think, also as a consequence of the Second Republic, has more connotations divisive agregadoras, as may occur in the united States or in Germany. That’s why the great success of the parent constituent is, indeed, to have found a terminology that, following the reflection of Jordi Solé Tura, no matter how you call it, the case is that it works. And it has worked for 40 years. It happens that the instruments are worn, the materials suffer as a people, and we need to revigorizarlos. The renewal of the covenant constitutional is not going to be an end in itself, when it begins to occur, but that will be a conduit, a mechanism through which we can begin to rebuild some of the consensus that is broken. This is a little issue. But, yes, I think that the autonomous State is a federal State and that one of the great challenges that we have right now is perfect our territorial model.
“I want young people to feel this Constitution as your own, and that requires reform”
Q. When you speak of the consensus that is broken, what is broken basically?
A. it Is evident that in Catalonia it has broken the constitutional consensus as a result of the failure by a minority of the majority of the Catalan society of the statute of autonomy. That is one of the consensus for the re-build. The second has to do with something that seems fundamental to me, and it is the way it develops the life policy (in democratic politics, both the substance as the form is essential) and, therefore, with the need for participation, especially of younger generations, in the process of renewal of the covenant of the constitution. I do not speak of a constituent process because I don’t think that we have to fall into a sort of adanismo that does not recognize the virtues of the Constitution, but I do believe that the forms of political participation have changed. Logically, they have to have as the epicenter of the Congress of Deputies and, therefore, representative democracy, but around it you can vehicle many energies and currents constructive, that will energize our democratic system.
“In Catalonia has broken the constitutional consensus; there is that recomponerlo”
Q. Like what?
A. What has been the experience of the last constitutional reforms? Almost have made it back to the citizenship, in a hurry. When I speak of opening channels of participation, I refer to open channels of dialogue, for example, to see what further rights we can incorporate into the Constitution. Environmental law, for example, was not a high priority in 1978 as it is today, when we are facing the challenge of climate change; the equality of género is in our Constitution, but not so self-evident as I believe that after the march 8, feminism would like to see reflected. The who has not only fathers but mothers of the Constitution would already be a breakthrough that would reflect the plural reality of our society. There are aspects that have to do with the world of work, with rights linked with the information society and the digital society that also have to be incorporated. There are many discussions that could very well invigorate our democracy and, in terms of the constitution, to enrich our text.
Q. The Constitution says that Spain is a social State; however, many analysts speak of the rupture of the social pact…
A. There comes of new Europe. Antón Costas, and Joaquín Estefanía have been written about the need to re-sign a social contract, and it is true that the Constitution is part of that new contract. The great task that we have political parties is to know how to understand that to a large extent the success of our political projects, at the national level, is going to depend a lot on the luck of Europe because, in the end, the renewal of the social contract must have as protagonists not only the State, the autonomous communities and Municipalities, but also, and very fundamentally to the EU. When we talk about environmental rights, if we do not assume a series of political commitments at the supranational level, we’re hardly going to be able to do something effective. If we speak of a taxation that is fair, as established by the Spanish Constitution, we can hardly cope and give a real answer to large corporations, digital or to tax havens if we do not speak in european terms. And what to say of the labour mobility, which affects many young people, and to the need to recognize the social and labour rights in the whole of the continent. This new social contract, which, obviously, has a chapter that must be the renewal of our covenant of the constitution, with its gaze towards Europe, is also necessarily imbricated in the architecture of Europe in the future. That’s why I think it is very important to what I said before. In Spain it is clear that the strengthening of our structure, autonomic has a lot to do with the european project. A federal Europe with greater integration, with Bahis Siteleri the embryo of a european budget, with the economic and monetary union is completed, or with a joint advocacy has to be present in the political debate about our Constitution. We are already in precisely the avant-garde european posed by France and Germany.
Q. When he says “the important thing is that it works”, does it also applies to republic and monarchy? What matter the shape of the State is that to work?
A. Honestly, now that I have the possibility of knowing first-hand the work that has made these 40 years ago and that makes today the Royal House, and in particular the king Felipe VI, I think that the parliamentary monarchy is, right now, the centrepiece of a great constitutional consensus that was forged in 1978, and I hope that lasts. Felipe VI is the king of his time, a king that defends gender equality, the commitment of Spain in the fight against climate change, workers ‘ rights and that it has a great sensitivity with the Catalan question, and with the diversity of our country, as much as the pro-independence catalans have been criticised. Before evoking I the Second Republic. It should be recalled that when the pro-independence people wanted then secesionarse of Spain [1934], in reality they did against the Republic. Now they are doing it against a parliamentary monarchy. That is to say, gives them the same type of structure and State model that we have, what we want is to go against the be of Spain.
Q. is There enough institutional loyalty at this time as to make a compact constitutional?
A. Good. If you look at the PP, when they ruled did so slowly, and now in the opposition are accelerated. I think it is also a little product of the political time that we live in, where news items expire after two hours. The main route of communication that have now the same citizens are the digital media and television, and, unfortunately, the expiration of the news, for very good and important they may be, is of minutes. What I mean by this is that we are in a democracy inmediática. Very conditioned by the media and very immediate. That longing to respond rapidly, by setting a position, makes the policy more vulnerable to the pressures. Politics of the times, and this is one of the lessons that I have taken in these months that I have been president of the Government, are different from the positions of the media, and that does not mean that you don’t have a political position, but simply that it’s your time to be able to respond to some of the issues later. All that vulnerability of the policy that agreements and consensus more difficult.
Q. is There a reform constitutions that can be carried out rapidly, as happened with the famous article 135?
A. In connection with the 135 the position of the Government of Spain, the PSOE, has always been the same, which I have defended. It has to be complemented with a commitment to a social minimum. In connection with the reforms, I agree. If we conceive of the need for our Constitution to evolve, that is to say, a mechanism for rebuilding the consensus that they can be weakened, broken, or in need of a new impetus, I think we should start with items where there is consensus. For example, the Government of Spain has requested a report to the State Council for the reform of the aforamientos, which has had the unanimous support of the members of that body. The idea is to see how we translate them in a proposal for constitutional reform that will take you to the Congress. In theory, all the parliamentary groups are in agreement. When I say all, are all. Maybe it is a good starting point. Or for example, I remember that article 49 defines persons with a disability in a way that has nothing to do with that right now they claim. This modification should also be a good starting point. I mean, the great adventures at the end start with small steps and, therefore, it is not necessary to start talking of elements on which insurance we have great differences, but those in where it begins to be agreement. If you are asking me if I would like that the Constitutional Commission would be open all the legislatures, we would say yes. Just to be able to discuss and go see what elements of improvement of our Constituentn we can incorporate, how you can go to evolve. This is not to set deadlines, but an open process in the Constitutional Commission of Congress of Deputies as a meeting point.
Q. If you had a legislature the entire front, what concrete proposals would you make?
A. we are doing this Already. There are some who are surprised and say “you have 84 mps”, well, yes, 84 deputies, but I understand that for the reform of the Constitution on the limitation or suppression of the aforamientos there will be 350 deputies, and the Senate equal. Then it is not so much the number of parliamentary from of which proposes a particular constitutional reform but, first, the social support that has, I think, in this case it is much, and in the second place, the eventual parliamentary support that you can reach.
Q. Start by small things, in which it can quickly reach an agreement, and demonstrate that the Constitution is refittable.
A. More than small, I’d say for the things in which already there are meeting points. If we can make a reform of the Constitution, although it is punctual, in a topic that has a consensus so important as it may be, for example, of the aforamientos, I think that we will have rendered a great service to the force of our Constitution.
Q. how The politicians use too the Constitution in their fighting election?
A. Yes. Right now there is a current in that sense. Always is exacerbated when the right is in the opposition. Before, it was a voice, now there are two voices and a half, with that is out of Parliament, but perhaps are not aware that they are feeding both the PP and Citizens, with its rightward shift. That will be your responsibility. In any case, there is a feeling heritage of symbols, of concepts such as Spain or the Constitution, which I think is dangerous. When Married together ‘ x ‘ amount of political parties, does not call the PSOE and try to take ownership of constitutionalism, is doing a disservice precisely to the Constitution.
“suddenly re-emerging in the field of the right and left tics that we thought forgotten”
Q. what The left doesn’t do that?
A. We are less than symbols, but yes, we too, let us say, in the most progressive of the Spanish society, we have let that happen. I think that the Spanish flag is of all, but also the people of the left. Because the shield and the flag of constitutional visibilizan a series of values, a series of principles for which there were a lot of people who even lost his life during the franco dictatorship and the Civil War. There is a part of the left that was a minority within the communist party, that a little called a traitor to Santiago Carrillo by taking the parliamentary monarchy, for the sake of what Azaña asked: “Peace, mercy, forgiveness”, and that change is now in the direction of United we Can. It’s funny how those that were then in the minority, let’s say that today represent the majority or the leadership of a party so important to the political system as it is United we Can. A little bit of that leadership comes to reaffirm what was then the minority communist, the one for which the Transition policy was not in reality a transition to anything, but simply a transfiguration of the franco regime in a pseudo-democracy. And that, in that sector, legitimizes, in their eyes and from their point of view the right of self-determination of the peoples of Spain, because, according to them, is not a democracy we really have. Somehow, doing that suddenly arise again, in the right sphere and in the field also on the left, tics that we thought forgotten.
Q. The Socialist Party could have done something about it?
A. Well, I believe that United we Can has also made an evolution in his political thought and in their political action. For example, in the budget agreement have been assumed by the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact, and therefore is aligned with the main axes that define the european construction. That is good for the country. But yes, indeed, we, as the great social-democratic party of Europe and of Spain, we also work to empathize with the causes of regeneration at a given moment were in the 15-M. I’ve Always said that the new Constitution must be a Constitution with which to identify the people of the 15-M. But not in terms of the constituent process, but simply to see what positive elements took the social movement so spectacular, that gave an image so positive of our country, both inside and outside of Spain, because now we forget, but while in other societies they were seeing reactionary movements, here, in Spain, the people began to talk about how to redistribute the wealth, how to deal with the issue of the evictions, he went out to the best of our society. We should support the causes that deserve punishment and bring them to the public action. And that is something that we can do as a political organization, but also with other political organizations.
Q. And is it possible to a Constitution in which they feel represented the 15-M and the PP?
A. why not. I am convinced that in the 15-M there were sons and daughters of people who vote for the PP. I believe that the 15-M was precisely a motion quite cross, a movement where there was a political party that represented him. I had friends who were of a party and of the other that were there for days. I insist, it was a moving regenerator and as a movement regenerating not belong to any political party but to all.
Q. What are those transformations?
“The renewal of the covenant constitutional is a channel to come up with some consensus broken”
A. I think that Spain has lost a decade and now the aim is to gain a decade. In reality, it is a sort of life cycle, with five essential transformations.
The first is the education. It is true that we have to adapt our education to the society of the XXI century, the technological changes that are moving, and when I speak of education, not only I’m talking about basic education, I am speaking of the university, professional training, or even of the active policies of employment that is self-evident that need to be renewed.
Two. The labour market and the business fabric. We talk about the Constitution but we must also speak about Thistute of Workers, that is truth that leads to change during the last decades, and that it is time that in the next legislature let us open a great debate with the social partners on this new status.
Three. We need to talk about taxation. What State of welfare do we want to. And from there, see how what we fund. This is a debate we have to open seriously. Obviously there’s going to be ideological conflict, but I think that is reasonable to ensure the principle of universality in education, in health, ensure a decent pensions, that is to say, they are indexed to price developments, the cost of living and, of course, clean up our public accounts, because we still, unfortunately, a public deficit is high, in relative terms, with the EU and also a public debt high.
Four. The ecological transition. It is clear that we need to transform our energy system, our system of mobility, and all of that is going to need at least a decade to do so.
Fifth. The constitutional reform.
Q. Gives the impression that what is within the constitutional reform is the land reform. Because for the other modifications it is not necessary to change the fundamental text…
A. The discussion on fundamental rights is within the constitutional reform. And when I put him fifth point does not mean that it is the fifth, but I think they are five compact lenses that feed each other. And yes, I think that is an error of communication of the socialist party that when we talk of constitutional reform is always associated with the territorial issue. But in reality we have always spoken of the constitutional reform in a much wider sense. We are most interested in as you left the debate on the rights, freedoms. I also understand that there are people who have objections to speak of all these things, but most likely it is time for a mature society such as ours, 40 years later, has the face of a generation capable of reforming the Constitution, that is to say, not to approve a new, because it is not necessary, but that reform the present. There is a very nice behind the covenant constitutional: no longer a social contract of sorts, an alliance between generations. I would like the youth to feel like this Constitution as his. And that requires reform.
