The PNV candidate for Lehendakari, Imanol Pradales, receives La Vanguardia at Sabin Etxea a few hours after Iñigo Urkullu announced the date of the elections and gave a speech that looked like an epilogue. The date of the elections, next April 21, appears doubly marked on the calendar of this university professor and doctor in Sociology and Political Science, since it will coincide with his 49th birthday, and urges him to make the most of his agenda during the next few years. 56 days. Pre-election surveys have detected that, like the rest of the candidates, he is still little known to most of the electorate, although there is not a hint of concern in his speech, determined and very marked by his status as a sociologist.
You have just over 50 days to make yourself known and present your project to Basque society. Is it enough time?
The project must be presented fundamentally in the campaign. Now we are in a phase in which we must continue listening to experts, agents and Basque society in general. From that listening we are incorporating ideas and suggestions to present what we understand to be the best project for Euskadi. Enough or insufficient is the time we have, and we must make the most of it.
Are you worried about your low knowledge rates among the electorate?
All of us candidates are in a very similar position, since we are all new. In that sense, it does not worry me because it is not an element that will modify the position of each candidate. Political communication requires presence and notoriety, and we have two months to work on it.
Let's start by knowing his coordinated policies, regarding the territorial issue, he has defined himself as a pragmatic independentist, "with his feet on the ground"...
The Basque Nationalist Party continues to be an instrument at the service of the transformation and freedom of Euskadi, and obviously, the ideology of the PNV is what it is and those of us who are in charge of the representation of the party, obviously, are what we are. That does not prevent one from knowing the society in which he is and the historical and political moment in which he lives. I define myself as an independentist with my feet on the ground because I know the reality from which I come and in which I am.
And as for the left-right axis? Which definition do you feel most comfortable with: Christian Democrat, socioliberal, social democrat...?
I feel very comfortable with what the PNV has done historically, which is an interclass party that has had the ability to incorporate working class people, along with people who may have been small or medium-sized businessmen, etc. There has been a capacity for integration that I believe is the formula for the success it has had politically and electorally. I don't like labels; We must talk about the policies we develop, and there the PNV has promoted policies to promote the creation of wealth and employment and, at the same time, the cohesion of society. They are two faces of the same coin.
In four years, the PNV has gone from practically its electoral ceiling in municipal and general elections to being close to its electoral floor in these elections. What has happened in these years?
Many things have happened and the world has become very complicated. There have been international impacts that have affected all those formations that were at the head of governments. We have experienced a pandemic shock that as a society has affected us more than we thought, we also see that society has become more demanding with respect to public policies, there is a disaffection towards politics that especially affects those who govern... They have happened many things and the PNV, as the governing party that it is, has not been oblivious to all that. Furthermore, being in power and governing, having that focus from the management point of view, it is obvious that on some issues we have not gotten it right or we have not known how to explain to society what we intended to do. This has generated a disaffection that in our case emerged in the municipal and regional elections, especially in the form of abstention. In any case, it is important to say that we were already identifying that something was moving in Basque society and that is why we activated the Entzunez eraiki listening process (build by listening).
The EiTB Focus survey reflected that among young people, especially between the 18-29 and 30-44 age groups, EH Bildu clearly leads the PNV. Do you perceive problems connecting with youth?
In the field of youth, despite the policies we have developed, we clearly have to improve in terms of the ability to connect we have with young people. I don't know if other parties have it, but I think we have to improve this capacity for emotional connection. In any case, we cannot put the entire young group in the same bag. A person of 20 or 25 years old is not the same as one of 35 or 40. Their vital moments, needs or demands are very different. A young family, with children, has a different way of reading the political and public sphere than young people of 20 or 22 years. In any case, I think we have to make a special effort to emotionally reconnect with the age groups between 30 and 40 and a bit, a little with my generation, so that we can somehow continue building the country.
Furthermore, something happens that is important, and that is that the youngest, from the point of view of the country's memory and the political positions that each of the political families have maintained regarding what has happened in this country in terms of violence, they simply are not there. They are not aware, and in terms of historical memory they are not reading what people over 50 may still be reading.
In order to reconnect with the electorate, in this pre-campaign he has been talking about a “Euskadi of well-being, reliable and global.” What are you trying to claim with that leitmotif?
The lever of self-government, which was the bet of the PNV, has brought us to a society of well-being, with high quality of life rates, although, obviously, we have our problems. However, success in the past is no guarantee of success in the future. We are in an international and European moment in which things have become very complicated. Populist movements have appeared around the world that seek to undermine democratic foundations and principles. That worries me a lot and it also worries the party, because we are a formation with deep democratic and humanist roots, and we believe that the problems of today's society are complex and the simple recipes, which populism often defends, can lead us to a very complex stage in which populist and totalitarian policies can roam freely. This is where he claimed that we have to reinforce the basic elements of present well-being in the face of those simple recipes of populism.
What do you understand by well-being?
For me, well-being is, first of all, health, an area in which we have seen that the pandemic has strained all health systems and we have seen the seams, and it is also emotional health. Wellbeing is the generation of wealth, because we hear populist messages that imply that money grows on trees. And this generation of wealth, the prelude to job creation and quality employment, involves betting on the new economy and facing the energy, ecological and digital transitions, areas in which many elements can appear to reindustrialize the country, as we did in the 80s. Wellbeing is an education that moves towards excellence, also in the field of Vocational Training, where we are an international reference, and in the university. And well-being is also security or reinforcing the scope of care.
What do you mean by a “reliable and global” Euskadi?
I claim that Euskadi must continue to be a country that people trust from abroad, when making investments or, also, when they visit us. The European institutions trust us because we are a serious and stable country in which we do not play with basic things. Furthermore, this reliability is important for those of us who live here, in terms of personal, vital and professional development. Regarding the concept of “global”, I demand that Euskadi be politically internationalized, just as our companies have been internationalized. We must be in multilateral organizations in which decisions are made that end up affecting us.
He has mentioned the issue of security, linked to his idea of well-being, and he also mentioned it in his first pre-campaign act. It is not an easy issue to handle politically, did you think twice before mentioning it?
When one intends to lead a country, one has to be aware of the problems, demands and challenges that society has. And this is an issue that must be addressed. At the moment it is not the big issue and we have a safe country, but we are beginning to have some indicators that are identifying a perception of insecurity, especially in some urban environments. Someone who works in the field of politics has to be aware of what is out there and look for solutions to fix the issues that are on people's lips. So, we must not ignore the problem and we must address this issue. Security is something that one values when one loses it, and that is especially seen when one travels around the world. And of course, it is an issue that I link to the well-being of this society.
He defends that the ecological transition “cannot be done overnight” because, he points out, “jobs and competitiveness are at stake.” Where do you see the problem?
We have approved a Climate Change and Energy Transition Law that someone defined as ambitious and realistic, two concepts that I fully share. We know where we have to go and the European Green Deal sets the horizon for how we should get to 2030 and 2050. Indeed, we must decarbonize the economy, but we must be realistic and look at what the country's industry is like, which is gas-intensive. Furthermore, in our homes we continue to use natural gas, we have a great dependence on the combustion vehicle... I defend the concept of transition, which means walking from one point to another, and I am concerned about certain discourses in which we point out as enemies of that transition to certain energy sources that today, unfortunately, we cannot do without. Certain companies or certain industries that employ thousands of people are also singled out. The transition must be made hand in hand with the industrial sectors that, by the way, are already in the process of decarbonizing Basque industry.
Is there room to go slower than we already are?
It's not about slowing down, it's about doing it right. I believe that the rhythms are marked, but it must be done well, without demonizing. I am concerned about some speeches that demonize, that focus on certain companies and certain industries that today do not have an alternative from an energy point of view.
The EH Bildu candidate, Pello Otxandiano, has criticized the “cost-benefit” of spending on infrastructure and questions whether the Basque Country is at the head of Europe in some indicators linked to spending on “cement”, to use his expression. Is too much money going to pay for infrastructure?
I believe that a country that invests in infrastructure is a country that is advancing and modernizing. Therefore, the concept of infrastructure should not be demonized, in my opinion. What are infrastructures? Isn't a residence an infrastructure? To give an example. It is an infrastructure of a social nature. When we build a highway, a highway or a bridge we are improving people's quality of life. Do we have to give up improving people's quality of life? I do not think so. When we build industrial land infrastructure to attract economic activity, is that not infrastructure? People who come to Euskadi and observe the development of the country in the last 40 years value the investment in infrastructure that the country has made. We are talking about investments in communications infrastructure, connectivity, industrial infrastructure or in the social sphere. Outpatient clinics and hospitals are also infrastructures. Furthermore, when we put on the table the need to invest in a certain infrastructure, it is usually because there is a social demand. We do analysis, we contrast these issues, we submit them to public evaluation... Afterwards, we present ourselves to the elections with a program and we understand that it is legitimized to the extent that we obtain social support. We must not fall into demagogy or demonize words.
In terms of self-government, what is your bet for the next four years?
In our roadmap there are three moments. The first involves transferring three powers that are pending in the Statute of Gernika and that must arrive now (on Friday, the day of the interview, two of them were closed). As for the second moment, we have given ourselves a maximum of two years to complete the Gernika Statute in its entirety, that is, including the Social Security economic regime. Thirdly, both parties, PNV and PSOE, have committed to opening a new scenario for the improvement of Basque self-government. There we have established several fundamental elements to move forward: national recognition of Euskadi, a system of guarantees based on bilaterality and recognition of the right to decide.
Do you see your party bringing down Pedro Sánchez's Government if it does not comply with those agreements set for the halfway point of the mandate?
I see the PNV keeping its word and I hope that the PSOE does the same and fulfills what it signed. The PNV has always opted for stability, in Euskadi and in the State. It is the best way forward in terms of self-government.
Will this be a four-year term?
It is a very complex legislature because, obviously, Sánchez needs all the political parties during the investiture and at all times, as the Lehendakari said. I believe that we must have a clear vision to see what is at stake and I believe that we all have to play with responsibility and stability in the legislature. That's what I hope happens. Nobody has a crystal ball and we don't know what will happen. Now we are going to face a moment of certain risk and tension, such as the approval of the budgets. And he has to convince us all again. There are continually elements on the table that can hinder the continuity of the legislature. But, I insist, we have to put the value of stability on the table to advance the milestones and commitments we have assumed. Of course, that is the PNV's bet.
And as for Junts? Do you see them committed to seeing the legislature move forward?
I think so. Junts has been moving towards a scenario of greater pragmatism. We are in a complex moment with the Amnesty Law, but I think it is betting on stability. This bet is going to bring us more returns from the Basque and Catalan national point of view. It's the smartest thing right now.
