The PP's impossible motion: Feijóo tries to point to PNV and Junts to "collectivize" responsibility for the "Government's corruption"

The motion of no confidence is not a real option. At least as of the day and time of writing these lines, the 176 votes needed for this constitutional tool to prosper only exist in the desire of Alberto Núñez Feijóo and in the graphics that the media prepare to explain, once again, the seats that would be needed for such an approach.

Why then does the PP insist on an “instrumental” motion of no confidence? Because it responds to a political strategy. One more of the many that parties launch to condition public debate. On this occasion, it could be defined as a contrast strategy: exposing the contradictions of a political adversary and forcing them to reveal themselves.

According to explanations from Génova, the objective is to “collectivize” the responsibility that, in the opinion of Feijóo's team, parliamentary partners have by continuing to support a government surrounded by judicial investigations into alleged corruption cases.

Beyond the judicial agenda, the PP believes that there is no longer a true “ideological coincidence” between the two center-right nationalist parties and the central Executive. For this reason, they insist on publicly pointing out both Puigdemont's and Aitor Esteban's parties, with the intention of increasing the political cost of their support for Pedro Sánchez.

Junts and PNV, the difficult political balancing act

Catalans and Basques have repeatedly demanded a change of scenario from Pedro Sánchez. From the demand for a vote of confidence, in the case of Junts, to the request for an early election, defended on several occasions by the PNV.

Both parties, decisive for the investiture resulting from the 2023 elections, show for various reasons —among them a judicial situation they consider “unbreathable”— a growing distance from the Executive they helped to sustain. However, political interests in Catalonia and Euskadi make any approach to the PP practically impossible as long as it maintains its current relationship with Vox.

A simple contact to explore a possible motion of no confidence, in which the votes of Santiago Abascal would be essential, could have too high an electoral cost for Junts and the PNV. The risk of appearing aligned with the radical right-wing party is, for now, a hardly surmountable limit for both parties.

In this way, both Junts and the PNV seem to have already signaled an emergency exit in case any of the judicial procedures affecting the government's environment —and especially those that could politically compromise Sánchez's hard core— forced them to distance themselves. But, for the moment, neither seems willing to abandon the moving train.

A tool for political pressure

The parliamentary reality turns the motion of no confidence into an exercise without practical scope. However, its mere formulation allows the PP to shift political pressure towards the government's partners and force them to take a public stance. In that sense, a motion can generate wear and tear, set the agenda, and even yield political profit even if it is doomed to failure from its presentation.

However, the permanent recourse to this threat also entails risks. Each bluff that is not materialized or that is born without real chances of prospering reduces its capacity for impact and erodes its credibility as an instrument of opposition. In addition, parliamentary times play a relevant role. An eventual motion requires procedures and deadlines that, in the current context of the legislature, would bring the political calendar even closer to the electoral horizon. By the time it could be fully substantiated, Spain would already be practically installed in the pre-campaign for the next general elections.