Ayuso did well to refuse to meet the president of the government next Friday in Moncloa. But only for one of the two reasons he cites in his press release this Monday.
In this press release, the president of the Community of Madrid declares that she declines this visit because it takes place “as part of a series of meetings following the negotiation of the dissolution of the Common Treasury with its independence partners”.
Second, Ayuso cites the institutional deterioration caused by the government. A deterioration illustrated by the defamations that the president of the government has addressed to him in recent days, accusing him of corruption.
“The President of the Government defamed the President during an official trip to Brussels, with very serious accusations which were in the same direction as his intervention the day before at the Congress of Deputies. The ministers were ordered to repeat during the last hours, in an unacceptable and inappropriate campaign by a government against an inferior administration” Sol’s statement said.
This campaign exists, and the PSOE therefore misses the truth when it asserts that “the president of the government did not defame anyone, he only recalled the tax offenses committed by his partner, offenses to which this same person confessed.”
The government’s claim is false. Because the president actually alluded to his complicity in two corruption cases.
The first, the alleged illegal collection of commissions by his brother during the pandemic. A case which has been archived by both the Spanish and European anti-corruption prosecutors, and which only remains alive in government propaganda.
The second, that of his associate, whom Pedro Sánchez described as a “confessed criminal”, forgetting that the recognition of an alleged irregularity is common as a method of defense in disputes with the tax administration and that this does not turn anyone into a “confessed criminal”. criminal.” “.”, a condition that only a judge can determine.
But Ayuso is wrong when he says he rejects the meeting with Sánchez for Sánchez’s pact with the separatists for the granting of a tax agreement.
This newspaper spoke out very clearly against the granting of this concert with arguments very similar to those put forward by the Community of Madrid. But it was precisely during a meeting with the president of the government that the Madrid president could have better defended her position against this agreement.
The loss of institutional sense on the part of the Spanish parties is one of the causes of the deterioration of the political climate in our country. But the responsibility is greater in the case of the government.
A government that has placed Ayuso in an impossible position: choosing between the sword, attend a meeting with the president who defamed her, accused her of corruption and demanded her resignation; or reject this meeting and be accused of institutional disloyalty. What option did the president have then?
It is up to the Government, more than anyone else, to take the greatest care with the forms.
And it is obvious that in recent days these forms have been ignored in favor of a defamation campaign against Isabel Díaz Ayuso, as they had been when the press, judges or the opposition were also attacked with forms that previously seemed the exclusive prerogative of the most extreme parties in the Congress of Deputies.
