'Maricarmen Decree': who will let themselves be intimidated?
It is evident that right now housing and immigration are decisive in public opinion and symbolize the concerns of the citizenry. The human condition, in its precariousness, has a natural tendency toward the logic of 'us and them' which easily tilts toward a dynamic of confrontation: the good guys and the bad guys. This logic, present at all levels of life, is capital in politics. The democratic principle that grants power (and the approval of laws) to whoever achieves half plus one of the seats contributes to this attitude.
Access to housing – a fundamental right for the dignity of people – is increasingly complicated for a good part of society. And official protection does not resolve the needs of the population, which turns the sector into a capital business. It is increasingly difficult to have housing within the reach of those who seek it. And the dynamic of pointing out culprits is triggered. Large holders, those who take the business to its limits, remain far from the sight of the majority of citizens. And, consciously or unconsciously, one looks askance at immigration, those who come from outside and enter the search for housing in competition with those from here of a lifetime. And thus resentment is cultivated as if they had come to take our jobs and make housing more expensive for us.
Cyclically, it happens that an event brings a problem to the forefront of the public scene. And at the same time, it highlights political parties. The right/left dynamic is sensitive, the former more captive to the so-called large holders and the interests of those who can simply buy housing and build assets; the latter often impotent when it comes to acting with a certain forcefulness against market abuses. And, nevertheless, the situation is serious, and domesticating the management of a fundamental good for any person has many limitations, because we all know the power of large owners and their capacity for intimidation.
A reformist policy, like the one intended to be set in motion after the scandal of the Maricarmen case, is not straightforward. It is clear that one cannot count on the right. The PP says that the market should not be restricted, and conservative nationalism, as we see with Junts, is in a tug-of-war, always to save the profit margins. We will see, in the end, what falls by the wayside from the list of good intentions: tax incentives, more levies for tourist apartments, extension of contracts until 2028, protection for the evicted, limitations on speculation, stability of contracts, tax bonuses for tenants, for example. And we will see if Sánchez, in his low hours, is capable of attempting some boldness or simply settles into resignation. And we will see how the parties that are negotiating the president's proposal get involved. If anyone drops out, their space of proximity will become clear. And if there are no dropouts –all are necessary to achieve the parliamentary majority– we will have to look in detail at the limits of the proposal, that is, what has been considered excessive and why.
In any case, it is interesting, as an exercise in cynicism, the publicity stunt that the large holders of Urbagestión have wanted to pull, offering Maricarmen, the 87-year-old evicted tenant, to return to the apartment at a price similar to what she was paying. It is almost shameful that there has to be a protest in the street for some who live off speculation to feel obliged to make the gesture they denied before the case reached the public. It will be worth paying attention to whether they find themselves in a situation like this again. A demonstration that cynicism has no limits. And that the reaction of public opinion can even unsettle those who believe they have a free hand to do as they please and that everything is permitted to them. Sometimes reality has this virtue: it can make us see that there are also limits for those who believe they have none.
In democratic societies, injustices can erupt publicly that would go unnoticed in other regimes. And, therefore, circumstances like this must be taken advantage of to move things forward. Will the Spanish Parliament pass the test? Will those who have reservations give in? Will they be capable of stopping some initiatives without blushing? For the moment, the one that does not deceive is the right: Vox and the PP have placed themselves where they are, on the side of the large landlords, in the name of freedom and the powerful, of course. It seems that only one unknown remains: Junts.