Monday, January 31, 2005
President's update: Comments on AUN's meetings with political parties (Jan 31, 2005)
To our members and website readers: There has been some interest and perhaps concern expressed about the widely reported meeting Enrique Climent, our Vice President and I had in Valencia in mid January with senior members of the PSPV/PSOE, that is the Valencian Socialist party (see the article below). The two officials were Eugenio Burriel, and Francesc Signes, who are the ones responsible for "Urbanismo" and environmental issues for the Socialist party in the Valencian Cortes (legislature). Burriel was the Minister (Conseller) for the Socialists in 1994 when the infamous LRAU was adopted, over the sharp criticism of the then opposition PP, which won the elections the next year.
We wish to assure everyone that we have gone neither mad nor political. As we explained to the PSPV and the media, we intend to speak to all the parties-on a non partisan basis, to build support for or at least understanding of our positions, before the wretched new land law- the very unlovely "LUV" ( Ley Urbanistica Valenciana) comes before the Cortes. We'll even ask to see the PP-but we are sure they wouldn't see us until we turn up the heat by seeing the others. To some extent we started this round some months ago with calls on Sr. Blasco and the Sub Delegada for Alicante- appointed by the PSOE in Madrid. With the Socialists we were also now trying to get them away from defending the, LRAU etc. since they created that one back in 1994-over the opposition of the PP. I believe we did that- now they blame the PP for what became that party's law, since the original "high purpose" was subverted in a decade of PP rule. Burriel, who is one of the intellectual heavyweights in the PSPV, apart from being the "responsible" Socialist minister when the LRAU was passed into law, has become a solid foe of his former political ally, Blasco, whom he replaced in 1992/3 when Blasco got kicked out of the cabinet for a scandal involving the Salinas in Calpe.
To the extent we could, we wanted to get the PSPV away from the line they seemed to be taking a few weeks ago when one of their members wrote a piece in El Pais attacking us and foreigners in general-quickly picked up by one of the PP's flacks in another article in the media it aligns with, if not controls. Given what we were told, I think we can count on the PSPV to be firm in its opposition to the draft LUV when it is debated in the Cortes. What tangible effect that will bring, we'll need to wait and see. It can't hurt our cause-and we should not be seen as lining up with the Socialists-I hope that along with the Greens , etc. it will be the other way around. From our perspective it is better for the various parties in the Cortes to be fighting each other, and looking to support our cause, than attacking us- which has happened. On January 27, in an article in Levante, Manuel Prieto Honorato, writing on behalf of the PP, attacked Burriel in person and laid the blame back on the Socialists- and implicitly the Zaplana PP faction, while praising the efforts of the Camps regime, which will culminate in the presentation of the new legislative "tool" the LUV to the Cortes. AUN was mentioned in the article, but the attack was focused on the PSPV.
The PSPV/PSOE has, as a result of our meeting, publicly pledged to fight "Abusos" under the land laws, just as we have been doing. We part company on some major positions, however. For example, given what we (and FIPE) have ascertained from real estate agents, Spanish and foreign , the housing market here-as predicted by the Economist , European Banks ( EIB, etc. ) and others, is very soft, we cannot agree with the PSPV that there is an "enormous" amount of development pressure on the Valencian Community, notwithstanding the climate. The pressure is a "land grab" one, pure and simple. The LRAU inspired system distorts normal market forces and results in the costs of purchase being so artificially high that there are relatively few buyers in relation to the land available. That of course hurts the constructors more than the promoters, who grab land, borrow money against that land at their elevated prices, and then often ship their takings offshore. The high cost of land then provides the "social" justification for continuing the process, as though normal supply and demand forces were operating freely.
Another core issue dividing us is that of "social interest" (or variously, "public benefit" or "general interest") a vaguely defined concept and a distant ( somewhat illegitimate) cousin of the British " compulsory purchase" or the USA's "eminent domain". The Socialists share the concept with the PP that somehow, given that ownership of property is not considered to be an "inalienable right", in this country, any property is up for grabs by any administration, without any or with only minimal compensation and against no objective or any reasonable criteria. As one of the architects of the land laws, Gerardo Roger, pointed out some time ago, the use of vague expressions such as "social interest" and "public benefit" have been justifying land grabs in Spain -maybe all the way back to Roman times. He was outraged at the attack, eg. by the Petitions Committee on a historic custom. Perhaps he also wishes to bring back "Autos de fé" , and burn a few heretics.
Somehow, just because of the nice climate, there is a belief that there will be an endless supply of buyers, foreigners especially (since Spaniards can't afford the "social responsibility" involved -or are too cunning to get hooked), who are prepared to come here with their hard earned life savings, and buy less and less for more and more, just to surrender their property, bought at retail, at short notice for nothing or next to nothing to contribute to the fortunes of bent politicians or rich developers under the guise of this "social interest" . It is a variation on the classic folkloric childrens' tale about "The Ant and the Grasshopper"- very Grimm indeed. No respect for property rights, nor the Spanish Constitution (eg. Art 33), let alone EU laws and norms or the draft EU constitutional treaty which contains a brief compendium of those rights (Art. II.77) and to which pious and thus far empty pledges are made by both the PP and the Socialists.
Our PSPV interlocutors realized that the PP government is trying to grasp the moral high ground from the Socialists by laying emphasis on the need for "social housing". Fine in principle, but the practice will likely be something else and it may just be more smoke than fire. To some extent, if not at best, this is a "make work" scheme for the constructors who can't build and sell elsewhere. The question is where the money will come from to build the tens of thousands of "VPOs" for Spaniards who can't afford entry into the normal housing market. That said, "social housing" has its own dynamic. It is known for example, that such building can be converted into tourist housing, second or retirement homes, very easily. In some instances, buyers will pay large amounts of "black money" under the table to get officially subsidized housing from the builders. All this would not be so serious, but for the fact that construction has become the "mono culture" that, in the main, drives the Valencian economy, at a time when tourism is suffering, and agriculture and industry are flagging badly. It is unlikely that the PSPV and the PP will disagree on this high sounding issue. The Socialists did however, like the Petitions Committee fact finding mission, call for a halt to the approvals of NEW development plans- not construction, as Blasco has misconstrued matters in his statements.
All the above taken into account our meeting with the PSPV can be a boost for us elsewhere – the Socialist MEPs should know (since we've copied them on the articles) they no longer have to be defensive parents as regards the LRAU in Brussels and we might also gain some support in Madrid ( via Borrell who is now in our info loop, and thus to Narbona and other national ministers. Our success in getting through to such policy level people, including Rafael Blasco , was the subject of an article in the press on Jan. 23rd.) Borrell himself could be a big help as Europarl President when the next investigation team comes here in April- so we believe- and more so when it presents its report to him and the parliament. The courts here will also note the criticism of the "abusos" committed and encouraged under the land laws- I believe that will play in the favor of the victims, and that's what Burriel suggested too.
Necessity often makes for strange bed fellows. We went into the meeting with some solid objectives, well aware that some of the towns PSPV/PSOE members control are just as bad as those under PP domination. I think we got it right this time. We are now seeking a meeting with the PP led Diputación de Alicante to press our case.
Subject: Panorama 19 1 2005: Abusos Urbanísticos No recurre al PSPV para frenar la Ley Urbanística
Abusos Urbanísticos No recurre al PSPV para frenar la Ley Urbanística PRESENTAN AL GRUPO SOCIALISTA EN LAS CORTES SU INFORME CONTRA LA FUTURA LUV QUE SE DEBATIRÁ LOS PRÓXIMOS MESESRepresentantes de la asociación "Abusos Urbanísticos No" trasladaron al grupo socialista en las Cortes Valencianas su informe contra el borrador del anteproyecto de la Ley Urbanística Valenciana (LUV), que se debatirá en el parlamento autónomo en los próximos meses.
PANORAMA-ACTUAL - 19/01/2005 20:08 h.
El vicepresidente de la asociación, Enrique Climent, afirmó que han iniciado una ronda de reuniones con los diferentes grupos políticos con representación en las Cortes, para informarles de su postura y entregarles un informe con comentarios y propuestas alternativas al borrador de la LUV.La primera reunión se celebró esta tarde cuando Climent y el presidente de la agrupación, Charles Svoboda, fueron recibidos por el secretario de Territorio y Vivienda y el secretario de Medio Ambiente del PSPV-PSOE, Eugenio Burriel y Francesc Signes, respectivamente.Según manifestó Climent, los socialistas comentaron que tenían "muchos puntos de conexión", por lo que este encuentro podría ser la primera de una serie de reuniones para comentar el problema urbanístico en al Comunidad Valenciana.Tanto Burriel como Signes se comprometieron, según el vicepresidente de "Abusos Urbancisticos No", a estudiar el informe y a convocarles en un futuro para "concretar y desarrollar los puntos coincidentes".Climent afirmó también que el secretario socialista de Territorio y Vivienda les entregó un dossier con recomendaciones dirigidas a los alcaldes de su partido para aplicar la ley en temas urbanísticos, "gracias al cual hemos comprobado que coinciden con nosotros en muchos puntos".Respecto al Gobierno valenciano, Enrique Climent aseguró que el pasado 13 de octubre remitieron el mismo informe al conseller de Territorio y Vivienda, Rafael Blasco, "que se comprometió a estudiarlo y a darnos una respuesta al respecto"."Hasta la fecha no hemos recibido respuesta alguna por lo que hemos decidido informar al resto de formaciones políticas para que conozcan nuestra postura", añadió el vicepresidente de la asociación.En cuanto al borrador del anteproyecto de ley, desde la asociación aseguraron que es un documento "que no pasa de ser una estafa legal" y que incurre en "una falta de respecto a la ciudadanía".Señalan que fomenta las urbanizaciones "innecesarias para un desarrollo social y sostenible en forma de campos de golf que destruyen el patrimonio agrícola valenciano".Climent señaló que, a falta de matizar las actuaciones concretas, también prevén trasladar su campaña de información a la sociedad e incluso pretenden realizar una manifestación en Valencia en el mes de marzo
To our members and website readers: There has been some interest and perhaps concern expressed about the widely reported meeting Enrique Climent, our Vice President and I had in Valencia in mid January with senior members of the PSPV/PSOE, that is the Valencian Socialist party (see the article below). The two officials were Eugenio Burriel, and Francesc Signes, who are the ones responsible for "Urbanismo" and environmental issues for the Socialist party in the Valencian Cortes (legislature). Burriel was the Minister (Conseller) for the Socialists in 1994 when the infamous LRAU was adopted, over the sharp criticism of the then opposition PP, which won the elections the next year.
We wish to assure everyone that we have gone neither mad nor political. As we explained to the PSPV and the media, we intend to speak to all the parties-on a non partisan basis, to build support for or at least understanding of our positions, before the wretched new land law- the very unlovely "LUV" ( Ley Urbanistica Valenciana) comes before the Cortes. We'll even ask to see the PP-but we are sure they wouldn't see us until we turn up the heat by seeing the others. To some extent we started this round some months ago with calls on Sr. Blasco and the Sub Delegada for Alicante- appointed by the PSOE in Madrid. With the Socialists we were also now trying to get them away from defending the, LRAU etc. since they created that one back in 1994-over the opposition of the PP. I believe we did that- now they blame the PP for what became that party's law, since the original "high purpose" was subverted in a decade of PP rule. Burriel, who is one of the intellectual heavyweights in the PSPV, apart from being the "responsible" Socialist minister when the LRAU was passed into law, has become a solid foe of his former political ally, Blasco, whom he replaced in 1992/3 when Blasco got kicked out of the cabinet for a scandal involving the Salinas in Calpe.
To the extent we could, we wanted to get the PSPV away from the line they seemed to be taking a few weeks ago when one of their members wrote a piece in El Pais attacking us and foreigners in general-quickly picked up by one of the PP's flacks in another article in the media it aligns with, if not controls. Given what we were told, I think we can count on the PSPV to be firm in its opposition to the draft LUV when it is debated in the Cortes. What tangible effect that will bring, we'll need to wait and see. It can't hurt our cause-and we should not be seen as lining up with the Socialists-I hope that along with the Greens , etc. it will be the other way around. From our perspective it is better for the various parties in the Cortes to be fighting each other, and looking to support our cause, than attacking us- which has happened. On January 27, in an article in Levante, Manuel Prieto Honorato, writing on behalf of the PP, attacked Burriel in person and laid the blame back on the Socialists- and implicitly the Zaplana PP faction, while praising the efforts of the Camps regime, which will culminate in the presentation of the new legislative "tool" the LUV to the Cortes. AUN was mentioned in the article, but the attack was focused on the PSPV.
The PSPV/PSOE has, as a result of our meeting, publicly pledged to fight "Abusos" under the land laws, just as we have been doing. We part company on some major positions, however. For example, given what we (and FIPE) have ascertained from real estate agents, Spanish and foreign , the housing market here-as predicted by the Economist , European Banks ( EIB, etc. ) and others, is very soft, we cannot agree with the PSPV that there is an "enormous" amount of development pressure on the Valencian Community, notwithstanding the climate. The pressure is a "land grab" one, pure and simple. The LRAU inspired system distorts normal market forces and results in the costs of purchase being so artificially high that there are relatively few buyers in relation to the land available. That of course hurts the constructors more than the promoters, who grab land, borrow money against that land at their elevated prices, and then often ship their takings offshore. The high cost of land then provides the "social" justification for continuing the process, as though normal supply and demand forces were operating freely.
Another core issue dividing us is that of "social interest" (or variously, "public benefit" or "general interest") a vaguely defined concept and a distant ( somewhat illegitimate) cousin of the British " compulsory purchase" or the USA's "eminent domain". The Socialists share the concept with the PP that somehow, given that ownership of property is not considered to be an "inalienable right", in this country, any property is up for grabs by any administration, without any or with only minimal compensation and against no objective or any reasonable criteria. As one of the architects of the land laws, Gerardo Roger, pointed out some time ago, the use of vague expressions such as "social interest" and "public benefit" have been justifying land grabs in Spain -maybe all the way back to Roman times. He was outraged at the attack, eg. by the Petitions Committee on a historic custom. Perhaps he also wishes to bring back "Autos de fé" , and burn a few heretics.
Somehow, just because of the nice climate, there is a belief that there will be an endless supply of buyers, foreigners especially (since Spaniards can't afford the "social responsibility" involved -or are too cunning to get hooked), who are prepared to come here with their hard earned life savings, and buy less and less for more and more, just to surrender their property, bought at retail, at short notice for nothing or next to nothing to contribute to the fortunes of bent politicians or rich developers under the guise of this "social interest" . It is a variation on the classic folkloric childrens' tale about "The Ant and the Grasshopper"- very Grimm indeed. No respect for property rights, nor the Spanish Constitution (eg. Art 33), let alone EU laws and norms or the draft EU constitutional treaty which contains a brief compendium of those rights (Art. II.77) and to which pious and thus far empty pledges are made by both the PP and the Socialists.
Our PSPV interlocutors realized that the PP government is trying to grasp the moral high ground from the Socialists by laying emphasis on the need for "social housing". Fine in principle, but the practice will likely be something else and it may just be more smoke than fire. To some extent, if not at best, this is a "make work" scheme for the constructors who can't build and sell elsewhere. The question is where the money will come from to build the tens of thousands of "VPOs" for Spaniards who can't afford entry into the normal housing market. That said, "social housing" has its own dynamic. It is known for example, that such building can be converted into tourist housing, second or retirement homes, very easily. In some instances, buyers will pay large amounts of "black money" under the table to get officially subsidized housing from the builders. All this would not be so serious, but for the fact that construction has become the "mono culture" that, in the main, drives the Valencian economy, at a time when tourism is suffering, and agriculture and industry are flagging badly. It is unlikely that the PSPV and the PP will disagree on this high sounding issue. The Socialists did however, like the Petitions Committee fact finding mission, call for a halt to the approvals of NEW development plans- not construction, as Blasco has misconstrued matters in his statements.
All the above taken into account our meeting with the PSPV can be a boost for us elsewhere – the Socialist MEPs should know (since we've copied them on the articles) they no longer have to be defensive parents as regards the LRAU in Brussels and we might also gain some support in Madrid ( via Borrell who is now in our info loop, and thus to Narbona and other national ministers. Our success in getting through to such policy level people, including Rafael Blasco , was the subject of an article in the press on Jan. 23rd.) Borrell himself could be a big help as Europarl President when the next investigation team comes here in April- so we believe- and more so when it presents its report to him and the parliament. The courts here will also note the criticism of the "abusos" committed and encouraged under the land laws- I believe that will play in the favor of the victims, and that's what Burriel suggested too.
Necessity often makes for strange bed fellows. We went into the meeting with some solid objectives, well aware that some of the towns PSPV/PSOE members control are just as bad as those under PP domination. I think we got it right this time. We are now seeking a meeting with the PP led Diputación de Alicante to press our case.
Subject: Panorama 19 1 2005: Abusos Urbanísticos No recurre al PSPV para frenar la Ley Urbanística
Abusos Urbanísticos No recurre al PSPV para frenar la Ley Urbanística PRESENTAN AL GRUPO SOCIALISTA EN LAS CORTES SU INFORME CONTRA LA FUTURA LUV QUE SE DEBATIRÁ LOS PRÓXIMOS MESESRepresentantes de la asociación "Abusos Urbanísticos No" trasladaron al grupo socialista en las Cortes Valencianas su informe contra el borrador del anteproyecto de la Ley Urbanística Valenciana (LUV), que se debatirá en el parlamento autónomo en los próximos meses.
PANORAMA-ACTUAL - 19/01/2005 20:08 h.
El vicepresidente de la asociación, Enrique Climent, afirmó que han iniciado una ronda de reuniones con los diferentes grupos políticos con representación en las Cortes, para informarles de su postura y entregarles un informe con comentarios y propuestas alternativas al borrador de la LUV.La primera reunión se celebró esta tarde cuando Climent y el presidente de la agrupación, Charles Svoboda, fueron recibidos por el secretario de Territorio y Vivienda y el secretario de Medio Ambiente del PSPV-PSOE, Eugenio Burriel y Francesc Signes, respectivamente.Según manifestó Climent, los socialistas comentaron que tenían "muchos puntos de conexión", por lo que este encuentro podría ser la primera de una serie de reuniones para comentar el problema urbanístico en al Comunidad Valenciana.Tanto Burriel como Signes se comprometieron, según el vicepresidente de "Abusos Urbancisticos No", a estudiar el informe y a convocarles en un futuro para "concretar y desarrollar los puntos coincidentes".Climent afirmó también que el secretario socialista de Territorio y Vivienda les entregó un dossier con recomendaciones dirigidas a los alcaldes de su partido para aplicar la ley en temas urbanísticos, "gracias al cual hemos comprobado que coinciden con nosotros en muchos puntos".Respecto al Gobierno valenciano, Enrique Climent aseguró que el pasado 13 de octubre remitieron el mismo informe al conseller de Territorio y Vivienda, Rafael Blasco, "que se comprometió a estudiarlo y a darnos una respuesta al respecto"."Hasta la fecha no hemos recibido respuesta alguna por lo que hemos decidido informar al resto de formaciones políticas para que conozcan nuestra postura", añadió el vicepresidente de la asociación.En cuanto al borrador del anteproyecto de ley, desde la asociación aseguraron que es un documento "que no pasa de ser una estafa legal" y que incurre en "una falta de respecto a la ciudadanía".Señalan que fomenta las urbanizaciones "innecesarias para un desarrollo social y sostenible en forma de campos de golf que destruyen el patrimonio agrícola valenciano".Climent señaló que, a falta de matizar las actuaciones concretas, también prevén trasladar su campaña de información a la sociedad e incluso pretenden realizar una manifestación en Valencia en el mes de marzo
Comments:
Post a Comment
