Toni Gaspar (Faura, 1973), acting president of the Valencia Provincial Council and regional deputy for the PSPV, is a good observer of the health of a party that has already shown some cainite impulses after the results of 28-M. A man of consensus, this social democrat is, for many, a man capable of generating the necessary complicity, also intergenerational, to prevent the PSPV from eternalizing its journey as happened after the defeat in 1995.
It is surprising that the PSPV has not made an in-depth reflection on what happened on 28-M.
It is that the PSPV has always had a problem with two words: self-criticism and self-destruction. Between these two words we sometimes get lost. I think that the reflection is that we must be up to the task to make this self-criticism because a scenario is coming, a period of time, where we, who are the progressive majority of this autonomy and who have won votes and deputies in the Cortes, although we lost the Government, we must face that analysis. We have to respond to that, because people have not kicked us out. That is why we must avoid the fine line between self-destruction and self-criticism that we always carry as synonyms, this is not the time.
Isn’t it time to make that self-criticism now?
No. This is not the time to confuse self-criticism with self-destruction. Self-criticism must be done, but taking into account the scenario: the PSPV has had more votes and seats. We cannot self-criticize what others have not done.
Could it be that this reflection has not been addressed because it is expected to be done after 23-J?
In the end everything matters. While we lose ourselves in self-criticism and self-destruction, juggling at the tables, there are elections on 23-J. Of course that conditions. Not only to us, but also to the PP, with which it has an affair. People have memories and in this short space of time they realize the inconsistencies that a party can commit, that’s why everyone is worried about not screwing up. I think people are nervous for that reason.
The first analyzes that were made from the PSPV on 28-M, pointed almost exclusively to the national factor, to the fact that these elections were a plebiscite, and that this context harmed the Consell de Ximo Puig.
I don’t like excuses. Things happen, people decide, you could have oriented the campaign in one way or another; there will always be things that will give you excuses. These are also done inside and outside the game. I don’t believe in excuses. People choose and from there you must make your decisions and do the necessary self-criticism. At this moment, the PSPV is the largest progressive reference of this autonomy and there are no excuses. Things have happened and the reflections must be made internally, not in public. From there, become what people have asked of you: be the progressive reference.
How does the PSPV face this campaign? Is there a desire or is the mood very low?
I am not in the organic life of the party, I can only speak about what I see; I am not in the electoral committee or in any other electoral body.
But is he a good observer?
I pride myself on knowing the street more than the party; the party is an instrument, but you have to know the street. I see concern on the street, that the vast majority of Spaniards do not feel identified with the position of the current government of the PP and Vox. I see them tolerant, not reactionary, I do not see that the president of the Cortes represents the majority of Valencians.
Some of us remember the events of the PSPV after the defeat in 1995. The party went into combustion. Are you afraid that this will happen again?
True, it was a process of self-destruction. There is a phrase that says that history repeats itself in its worst version. The scenario is different, although not all of the people, because there are people who were already there in 1995. The PSPV’s big effort is going to be a repeat of that scenario, which led the PP to govern for 20 years. We can’t afford it.
What needs to be done so that it does not happen again?
If I had the magic formula I would tell it. I think it will depend on the people, because the party is, in the end, people. What is there to do? Well, be up to it, so as not to confuse self-criticism with self-destruction. That means many things, including not starting with public fights, public knives, to begin with.
But a certain impulse to change leadership has already been visualized in the PSPV.
Leadership renewal is always put on the table when you have lost; when you govern nobody talks about it. Not only in the PSPV, let’s remember how the PP ended Isabel Bonig for not winning in 2019. Looking for changes in people is human when you are defeated. But the changes have the processes, the rhythms, the congresses… especially in the PSPV in which the militants do vote. Wanting to make those changes outside of those rules will not yield good results.
We have seen it in the preparation of the PSPV lists at 23-J. With a strong tension between the provincial proposal led by Carlos Fernádnez Bielsa to the proposal by Ximo Puig, which has been questioned.
You have your team of collaborators and you have to know how to say that if you jump into the pool it must be with water or you run risks. The subject of lists is very human. When you are in the government it is not noticeable, but at a time when these lists were drawn up, well, what has happened happens. I don’t see it as something exceptional, because it has always happened to us. That is part of the regulation of political parties and it is legitimate. Who wins? Well, the one with the most votes or more legitimacy.
Don’t you see it as the will of a sector of the party to question the leadership of Ximo Puig?
I see it more common than I would like, and I think that if we let people speak more, because I am in favor of making people feel represented in this decision-making, things would not be as they are. But I admit that I have not seen it as pleasant, it has not been, it was even unpleasant, but it is part of the rules of the game.
What is your assessment of what happened in the case of Jorge Rodríguez?
It changed his life and me too. I have it engraved in my memory. During these five years, against the opposition, against some media, and even against people from my own party, I have defended the presumption of innocence, not only for mine, but also for those of other parties. Justice has its deadlines, and its procedures, but until a judge says that a person is guilty, no one is guilty because the Constitution says so. I will always defend him. My personal conviction was that Jorge was innocent. Those who have to keep quiet are those who use justice for political benefit, keep quiet now. It’s one thing to get caught with the ice cream cart, but I experienced Jorge’s receiving kicks from many, for defending him.
Do you think that the PSPV has been unfair to Jorge Rodríguez?
I defended that we had to break that when one is accused must go outside, although it is true that in that dance we began together with others. You have to rectify and you can’t leave people stranded, especially when justice has not spoken. Here those who correspond to them get scared and it is easier to throw it out and say “I don’t know you anymore”. It is not human, it is not political and it is good for nothing. The decision was made legitimately and I respect that. But I tell you that either the big parties begin to change their attitude towards this issue or we will all be dead. There will be no one left.
Do you trust that there is a good complicity between Compromís, PSPV and Jorge Rodríguez so that this Provincial Council continues in progressive hands?
Jorge started in 2015 to change this institution to be progressive, and I am sure that he will continue to be progressive. I’m sure it will.
What conclusion did you draw from what we saw on Monday in the Cortes with the result of the vote of the Table in which the PSPV could not put a person because the PP gave part of its votes to Compromís?
In politics, when you make a decision, you have to see what your constituents will think; and not what the voters of Compromís will think that the PP votes for them, or surely someone from Vox. Or what do PP voters think of supporting someone they have fought at the Table? I am in favor of political coherence. These are the times that run, in which there is little coherence, as happens to Feijóo.
Compromís defended that as a third political force they should have the right to be on the Table.
Well, they say that, but the facts are the facts, and the facts are that they have a seat on the Board with the votes of the PP. The same ones that have made a woman from Vox president. I don’t know what your constituents will think.
How do you assess the PP and Vox pact to govern the Valencian Community?
It is a natural pact. Here people know where the Vox come from, and they come from the PP. The PP is comfortable with its ideology and Vox says certain things that many people believe must be done. The problem is that the PP also seems fine. It has not surprised me, and also they do not hide; they are sincere. When we went with Podemos and Compromís and they told us everything, and now they are silent.
Do you think that the PP and Vox are going to lead a counter-reform to Botanic policies?
They have the legislative power. But beware, I think the street is not aligned with that.
But they have won the elections.
Yes, they have won. But there have been many people who have not gone to vote. I do not see the street aligned with that supposed legislative reform that is predicted to us in that crystal ball in a destroyer plan. They can do it? Well yes, because they have the majority in the Cortes.
What role would you like to play in the courts?
What the political leadership of the party says. We are going to the opposition and we have to make an opposition that on occasions must be an extreme opposition against the extreme right. But always done with common sense.
