Carlos Mazón took precisely a year – and a few more days – to resign from the presidency of the regional government of Valencia, after in October 2024 an environmental catastrophe left a trail of death (229 people lost their lives) and destruction in the region. Currently underway is a Congressional inquiry into the events of that day, as well as an investigation by a Valencia judge to determine whether there is evidence of negligent homicide and negligent injuries that may have led to preventable deaths.
What is known is that despite the climate of alert in the region, no warning was given to the population until 8pm that day – when dozens of people had already lost their lives – and that Mazón spent the afternoon having lunch with a journalist instead of being at the command center where, allegedly, he should have been. It is true that it may prove that, given the violence of the elements that decided to fall on Valencia that day, little could have been done to save those who died or were injured in the tragedy. However, this does not mean that all necessary measures are taken to ensure this. And governments should be the first to set an example of an effort that rarely goes directly through them. We, here, have had our share of episodes of this kind: government officials who continue on vacation when there are fires of Dantesque proportions – whether on the mainland or on the islands; leaders who reject responsibilities in services that fall under their purview… and don’t be fooled if you think I’m only talking about the government officials currently in office. The truth is that we have too many cases piling up, in many national or regional governments and in various public bodies – because in private ones it becomes increasingly complex thanks to the so-called rules of compliance. And what signal does this give to citizens?
That maintaining a position, a title, is much more important than the citizens they swore to protect. That it is more relevant to continue to be called president, minister or prime minister than to do what they promised when they ran for office: act in the best interests of the population they have under their care. And if not even those who should be the most serious in their role do so – resigning when it is no longer sustainable, and due to public pressure rather than a matter of conscience and seriousness, does not count – how do we want to have a society in which each citizen admits their mistakes and their responsibility in the life of the community?
After all, how many positions and what salary is the life of each citizen worth? I have already written here that when governments legitimize a series of behaviors, they become acceptable throughout society. When they legitimize them due to lack of courage, this reality takes on even more serious contours. And perhaps we should all seriously reflect on this: what would we do if we were put in the same position? Would we have the courage to do different? The spontaneous response you arrive at is perhaps the best starting point for the demands that these times require.