"The December plenary showed us that PP and Vox confuse reality"]
Government spokesman Antonio Ignacio Martínez-Real, in an assessment of the ordinary plenary session in December, has said he does not understand "the stubbornness of the PP in maintaining a motion in which it was requested to collaborate with FAMDIF, and all this despite the fact that this collaboration It already exists, that said association already has a municipal office available to carry out its work every Wednesday from 9 am to 2 pm, and despite the fact that the association itself sent a press release on these individuals, nor is it understandable that a party that wants to aspire to govern is determined to want this year to give a subsidy through an agreement, which is not budgeted, something that is impossible to comply with in this budget year, but that will become a reality in 2020 as already explained " .
In Martínez-Real's opinion, "before the evidence, the PP tried to confuse reality and blame everyone for their mistakes, acting with disrespect for the work of both the Government and the association. Nor do we observe a reasonable explanation for what has been done. by the PP in its second motion on improvements in the Library At this point, the responsible councilwoman tried to reach an agreement with them, since the text presented by the PP contained some inaccuracies and errors; she asked the City Council to start the loan of books, when it is something that depends on the CARM; it asked to increase the schedule during exam time, something that has already been done, and modify the emergency exit, the latter question that would need a previous report and authorization from the CARM to be a building listed as BIC. To say that this emergency exit, which was built by a PP Government, is fully in accordance with the Law, we like it more or less, and this is foreseen in the Code
It is not understood the attitude of the PP not wanting to agree absolutely nothing, although, given the evidence and in view that they were alone, they had no choice but to support the motion of the Government, which unanimously went ahead, and that minutes before had refused to agree. "
For the socialist mayor, "VOX also tried to confuse reality with a vision of the exclusionary family and asking to eliminate taxes and favor those who have more. They asked to subsidize the IBI to large families without taking into account the economic capacity. Article 31 of the Constitution tells us that taxes should be progressive, so that those who have more contribute more.With the text proposed by VOX, there would be a paradox that a family of 4 members, with a single administrative salary, would pay more IBI, for example 22,000 euros per year (5,500 euros of income per capita), than a family of 7 members with two salaries of 88,000 euros in total (12,571 euros of income per capita). Being neighbors of the same building, the first would pay 484 euros and the second 48 euros.The Government recalled that, since 2018, 4% less IBI has been paid, capital gains have been reduced and that, thanks to the rise in the minimum wage of the Government of Spain, they are m
s numerous families who are entitled to bonus that takes into account income ".
"The positive part, does Antonio Martínez-Real conclude, was the consensus to create the Citizen Participation Council, following a CS initiative, and the Government's proposal for the approval of the 2018 general account, without allegations or votes against returns to certify the financial and budgetary balance of public accounts. "
Source: Ayuntamiento de Cieza