This text belongs to Politics, the newsletter that Lola García sends every Thursday to the readers of ‘La Vanguardia’. If you want to receive it in your email, sign up here.
The mask war offered merciless scenes. That March 2020, the French authorities seized a shipment of four million masks from a Swedish company destined for Spain and Italy, then the European countries most affected by the pandemic. The weekly L’Express explained it, which reported the impression of the manufacturers: “Our interlocutors were crying, they urgently needed those masks.” It was not the only case, far from it. The politicians of each country reacted at first under the premise of every man for himself. Later, they would manage to agree on the joint purchase of vaccines and even a formula to finance economic recovery.
The context is essential to assess decision making. I remember that La Vanguardia, like other media outlets, was approached by supposed businessmen who claimed to have access to medical supplies or imaginative solutions to supply them. The newspaper tried to channel these offers to completely overwhelmed health authorities. The prevailing feeling at that time was that perhaps people who were in a position to provide solutions were not being listened to. Now, looking back, it is easy to think that some acted in good faith, but others may have been nothing more than clever characters wanting to get rich or, simply, with a desire for prominence.
The pandemic brought out the best and worst in all of us. The most detached solidarity was mixed with the most petty interest. Nobody would have understood that the exhaustive (and often exasperating) administrative controls were applied to the purchase of masks, PPE or respirators. During the state of alarm, the requirements for hiring were blown up. And it was assumed that some unscrupulous vivals could be caught there. After the emergency period, the Ministry of Health launched a framework contract for the purchase of material for 2,500 million, under the usual conditions and controls of the administration, and to which the autonomies could resort to acquire these products at a more competitive price. Most communities did so. It is the same procedure that is used with vaccines, for example.
In December 2020, the Supreme Court decided to bring together in a single resolution the fifty-odd complaints filed through criminal proceedings against Pedro Sánchez, his ministers and regional presidents of all parties. The complainants were very diverse, from Vox to organizations of relatives of the deceased. The court chaired by Manuel Marchena resolved that a political official cannot be held criminally responsible for everything based on his hierarchy. A person, the Supreme Court noted, cannot be charged “due to the mere fact of the position or position held in the organization, no matter how high it may be.” Only a very small number of complaints are pending in different courts. Even the Madrid Prosecutor’s Office understood that the controversial protocols of the Government of Isabel Díaz Ayuso did not prohibit referring the elderly from nursing homes to hospitals. The management could have been improved, but justice has so far considered that no politician deserves to go to jail for it.
Subsequently, the governments and audit courts of the different autonomies have carried out (or should have done) a review of their hiring during the pandemic, especially when they have detected cases of fraud in order to claim compensation. For example, the Madrid City Council was the victim of a scam that is being investigated in court by Luis Medina, son of the Duke of Feria, and a partner of his, who sold defective material at an exorbitant price to the city council taking advantage of the “laxity in the hiring controls” and the “urgency” with which it was needed, as explained by the judge, who exempts the municipal authorities, despite detailing that Medina received better treatment for being famous and that he obtained telephone numbers and information about who to direct his offer through the mayor’s first cousin.
The case of Koldo García, advisor to former minister José Luis Ábalos, is similar to the previous one in terms of procedure, but with a substantial political difference, which is that one of the beneficiaries of the commissions was an employee of the administration. Here, the alleged ringleader of the scam would be businessman Juan Carlos Cueto, but instead of finding a way to offer his services to the administration, he used a character, Koldo García, trusted by the minister. Hence Ábalos’s political responsibility, for not having known (or wanted) to see that the collaborator who became almost his shadow on a daily basis was not the right person to hold certain power. Even if Santos Cerdán had recommended it to him, as he stressed yesterday, he was the one who had to evaluate his suitability.
The truth is that the Koldo case, despite its simplicity for a judge, is a great political mystery. Did the character continue presenting himself as a man of the party for different ministries to do business even once Ábalos stopped being a minister? Did other political leaders listen to him, allowing him more scams? Did Sánchez know that his former minister’s behavior was not appropriate (even if he didn’t know the details) and that’s why he put it aside? What will the now-turned-PSOE deputy do from now on?… One thing is clear. The PP tries to extend the case further. ERC, in the midst of the electoral pre-campaign, is also trying to cast shadows of suspicion on its main rival, Salvador Illa.
Both the PSOE and the PP want to open investigative commissions in Congress and the Senate to use them in their favor, calling leaders of the other party to testify and taking advantage of the fact that the former has a majority in the Lower House and the latter in the Upper House. Any indication of taking advantage of a misfortune like the pandemic for personal enrichment must be investigated to the end, but applying the fan in individual parliamentary committees or launching broad-brush accusations can be counterproductive tactics. Especially for the left, whose voters demobilize more easily. So is the “and you more” response that Sánchez entered yesterday as a reply to Feijóo. When such a crude defense is used, it ends up paving the way for the fed-up voter to take refuge in the classic and unfair mantra of “they are all equal.”
