The president of the ANC, Dolors Feliu, has charged this Wednesday against ERC for agreeing with “the left of 155” – alluding to the PSC – some “autonomist” budgets and that do not address “in any way” the independence of Catalonia.
The agreement, which will be signed by the Catalan president, Pere Aragonès, and the first secretary of the PSC, Salvador Illa, at 4:30 p.m. in the Palau de la Generalitat, includes commitments to promote “major infrastructures” that the Socialists put as conditions, such as the Hard Rock project in the Camp de Tarragona, the construction of the Ronda Norte (B-40), the “modernization” of the Barcelona-El Prat Airport or the management of the Cercanías service.
At a press conference, Feliu assessed the budget agreement with the Socialists as “totally negative”, one of “the parties that carried out a repression that is still ongoing” against the independence movement, and regretted that “the possibility of joint strategy” of the pro-sovereignty parties, which obtained 52% of the votes in the last Catalan elections.
According to Feliu, the Government gives “an image of international weakness” by agreeing on the budgets without including “any aspect” related to self-determination and “shaking hands with the Spanish government party.”
Even so, he has predicted that the budget pact gives Aragonès “air to continue” with the current legislature, although he has warned the Government that it will find “much difficulty for support” from Catalan society, since these budgets were agreed with the PSC ” turn their backs” on the process.
Regarding a possible fourth independence list promoted by the ANC, Feliu has assured that it is an “option that may be necessary” and that “it is part of the roadmap” of the entity, although he has pointed out that “it is in full debate within the Assembly” and it is necessary to see “how this proposal develops.
On the other hand, it has considered “positive” the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the preliminary questions formulated by Judge Pablo Llarena because, in its opinion, to each question from the magistrate, the court responds with a “yes, but” and, behind each “but”, there is “a positive path initiated with a view to recognizing fundamental rights and, obviously, the rights of exile and self-determination”.
