The Congress has rejected the validation of the so-called housing law approved two months ago by the Council of Ministers. The norm provided for, among other urgent measures, the extension of rental contracts expiring before December 31, 2027, a 2% cap on renewals to curb abusive increases, and protection mechanisms for vulnerable people facing evictions. These measures originate from Sumar initiatives included in a broader anti-crisis decree by the Spanish government, which also included aid such as tax reductions on energy and fuel. With the opposing votes of Junts per Catalunya, the People's Party, and Vox, these measures have fallen. The rejection is not a minor episode and, given the comments in the media and social networks, it has clear reputational effects for Junts, as it reinforces the ambivalence of their ideological positioning. With its fall, concrete instruments are lost which, despite being limited, offered some immediate relief to thousands of people. They did not solve the housing problem, but they contained its harshest effects.Junts has justified its opposing vote by arguing that the decree was insufficient and did not address the structural causes of the crisis. Furthermore, as on previous occasions, its spokesperson in Madrid, Míriam Nogueras, has argued that one cannot continue to endorse isolated initiatives without broader and sustained negotiation that takes seriously the fulfillment of investiture pacts and Junts' demands. This position may be understandable from a strategic perspective for the party and the country, but for the most critical sectors, it becomes problematic when it ends up blocking protection measures in a context of housing emergency.
In this regard, ERC has criticized Junts's position and defended its support for the Spanish government by appealing to the need to respond to the emergency, without effectively conditioning it on the fulfillment of investiture pacts. This attitude, however, raises questions, as it implies endorsing specific measures (as has been systematically done throughout the legislature) without ensuring progress in sovereignty that would allow for addressing structural problems. In this context, Gabriel Rufián's criticism in terms of a simplistic dichotomy between “desire” and “left-wing” is, at best, short-sighted and tends to reinforce partisan demagoguery that impoverishes public debate. Reducing such a complex issue to this binary logic may be rhetorically useful, but it avoids addressing the core of the problem: how public policies are negotiated —or not— in essential areas and how support is achieved.In fact, ERC's position is also problematic and its unassertive stance has proven to be limited in achieving the objectives that justified support for Sánchez's investiture. ERC has been unable to effectively condition confidence and support for the Spanish government on the fulfillment of structural agreements, often appealing to the need to “save” stability or respond to emergencies. This attitude based on simple ideological confluence projects an image of systemic subordination that reveals an incongruity: the criticism of the non-approval of the decree coexists with a political practice that has failed to reverse key deficits in resources and decision-making capacity that are essential for structurally addressing this and other emergencies.While these dynamics of sterile confrontation between Junts and ERC are reproduced, the emergency in Catalonia worsens. The degradation and simplification of discourse not only do not help, but generate more citizen frustration. Forms, in politics, matter: their subversion favors anti-politics and a conception of democracy as spectacle. Instead of thorough negotiation by those who hold the key to governability, short-term –reactive– measures are prioritized that do not address structural causes and the need for public resources. The underlying issue, therefore, goes beyond this episode. Similar tensions accumulate in areas such as transport or public services, while fundamental issues such as the fiscal deficit or disinvestment remain unanswered. In all these areas, the difficulty of maintaining minimum agreements in crucial areas and the lack of real effort by Sánchez's government to negotiate seriously become evident.
Returning to the decree, it is advisable not to idealize it. It was, at best, a reactive response: designed to contain emergencies, not a preventive strategy capable of transforming the structural causes of the lack of affordable housing. Focusing the debate on this vote hides a deeper reality: in Spain, and in Catalonia, we have decades of insufficient housing policies. In Catalonia, the problem is exacerbated by limitations of resources and decision-making capacity, a sustained increase in population, and a rise in inequalities. The crisis is not a temporary one but structural.The difference with other European contexts is clear. In Germany or Switzerland, the weight of public or cooperative housing is much higher, which helps stabilize prices and offer real alternatives. Without this commitment, any measure will be limited. At the same time, limits and incentives are introduced to curb speculation: in Germany, taxation discourages short-term sales; in Switzerland, the purchase by foreign citizens or non-resident companies is greatly limited to prevent vacant housing.These measures stem from a key idea: housing for living in is not the same as a financial asset. Therefore, debates such as demographic growth must also be framed in terms of responsibility: it is not about growing or not growing, but about doing so while guaranteeing social cohesion and effective access to basic goods such as healthcare, education, or housing. This is where the debate becomes deeper. Housing is not just a commodity: it is a social right. The Spanish Constitution recognizes the right to decent housing (Art. 47) and establishes that property is subject to its social function (Art. 33). This implies that the right to property is not absolute and that limits can be established to prevent speculative uses and guarantee effective access.In an already classic article, Homelessness and the Issue of Freedom, Jeremy Waldron reminds us that freedom requires a space in which to be exercised. Without housing, rights such as privacy or autonomy become purely formal. This is a reflection that I often share with my postgraduate human rights students. This is the issue that should guide the debate. Because the housing problem is, above all, a matter of rights and democratic quality.
