Saturday, May 28

Covid-19: The PP offers to speak with the Government to change the law with its plan b after the end of the state of alarm | Spain

The Popular Party has offered this Monday to speak with the Government to change the law after the end of the state of alarm with its proposal for a plan b for the autonomous communities to manage the restrictions. The popular ones offer as an alternative the proposal of the Popular Group law registered a month ago in the Congress of Deputies, hours after the Minister of Justice, Juan Carlos Campo, raised, in a tribune in EL PAÍS, to reform the law if the The Supreme Court vetoes the decrees of some autonomies to maintain the curfew or confinements, a statement that he later qualified in an interview in La Sexta, stating that “right now” there is no “need to do so” and that the Executive does not normative changes are proposed. In an interview on Cadena SER, the general secretary of the PP, Teodoro García Egea, has indicated regarding a legal modification: “We have it very easy. The PP has registered a proposal of law and in 15 days it can enter into force. The Government is that it does not even have to do the work, it is registered and consulted with the main jurists of this country ”. The PNV has insisted that the state of alarm should be applied throughout the country and then set the conditions, in line with what the Lehendakari Iñigo Urkullu has been asking for for a month.

The PP takes the opportunity to charge against the Government for not having foreseen this situation of legal chaos after the end of the state of alarm. Pablo Casado has blamed Pedro Sánchez for the crowds this weekend, and has even accused him of causing infections and deaths. “We are very sorry to see the scenes of crowds in the streets and the only person responsible is Pedro Sánchez, because he has not wanted to approve a pandemic law as we have been asking for a year,” Casado complained in an act of the European PP in Madrid. “If right now there is no plan b and we have gone to plan c of chaos, the only person responsible is the Government of Spain. The absolute irresponsibility of the Government of Spain costs lives ”, he defended. The popular ones insist that their proposal for alternative legislation would solve the problems, although the reform of the law could not allow a curfew, but it did allow certain restrictions on mobility. “I make an almost desperate appeal to Sánchez for us to modify the law, because if he will not be responsible [de las aglomeraciones], and it can even be at a legal level ”, charged Casado.

Also Read  Earthquake: Haiti: a country in permanent crisis | USA

According to the PP, in 15 days it would be possible to approve this legislative reform. The main opposition party rejects the re-enactment of a state of alarm. “This phase of legislative blackmail has already passed,” García Egea pointed out, criticizing that the last state of alarm lasted six months.

A group of young people celebrate the end of the state of alarm, at dawn on Sunday in Madrid.
A group of young people celebrate the end of the state of alarm, at dawn on Sunday in Madrid.Bald Elm

Citizens, for their part, has once again put their proposal on the table for the National Court to validate the proposed restrictions. The deputy secretary general of the party, Edmundo Bal, has stressed that it would be a way to avoid “strange spectacles” that some communities “have a curfew” and others do not. “It would be very quick for us to agree to this reform,” he stressed. In addition, it has influenced, like the Popular Party, that Spain has gone “from the sole command to chaos.” On the other hand, he has highlighted the need for a “controlled” reopening of nightlife and has asked President Sánchez to “lead a government action” in this regard. “It will always be safer to control a nightlife venue than these episodes that occur in the street,” he pointed out, referring to the images of crowds and bottles on the street this Saturday in several cities in Spain.

The PNV spokesman in Congress, Aitor Esteban, has acknowledged having “been stunned” when the Minister of Justice raised the possibility of “making additional legal changes” for the autonomous communities to manage the pandemic after the state of alarm. “They have been so sure of the laws, they have told us over and over again that nothing is wrong, that everything has been thought out, that there is total legal security, and now the Minister of Justice says that? So how did they think about it? They cannot recognize that they have screwed up ”, he assured in an interview in Euskadi Irratia. In addition, it has insisted on requesting the application of the state of alarm throughout the State and then setting the conditions. “Later we will see the measures, because, if there has been an alarm, it does not mean that there should be a curfew or limitation of movements between territories,” he said. It has also been in favor of a modification of the Organic Law of Public Health of 1986, one of the measures proposed by the PP in its plan b, although it has pointed out that “it should be completed a little more” and that “others should be touched. laws ”.

Also Read  Social leaders in Colombia | They raped her, displaced her and killed part of her family. She forgave them, but now they haunt her again

These reactions come hours after the Minister of Justice, Juan Carlos Campo, expressed in an article in EL PAÍS the Government’s willingness to undertake the necessary legal changes if the Supreme Court vetoes the decrees of some autonomies to maintain the curfew or confinements. At the same time, he recalled that the regional presidents can ask the Government to approve alarm decrees only for their territories. A position expressed after a weekend in which the bottles and parties without security measures took to the streets after the state of alarm fell, last Sunday, which has increased the fear of new outbreaks.

In an interview on the show Red Hot from La Sexta, Campo has qualified that statement. The minister explained that he has “no problem” in “reviewing everything”, although he stressed: “right now there is no need to do so and, therefore, the Government is not considering a regulatory change now.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.