The school year and the start of the XV legislature they will practically go hand in hand. And both in schools and in Parliament, a determining milestone will take place, the distribution of seats. If the task of teachers is not usually easy -it is necessary to value who talks a lot, who is easily distracted or, even, who cannot see from a distance-, it will be less so for the Table of Congress, where this dance of chairs It has provoked the first row of the legislature. The PP has put the cry in the sky this Monday before the proposal, already discarded, that the PSOE and Sumar have presented.
“They take us out of what belongs to us“, denounce popular sources, without wanting to give further explanations, although hinting that in the scheme proposed by the socialists they would not occupy the entire bench on the right, where the hegemonic party of the conservative space has traditionally sat. Neither the PSOE nor Sumar wanted to give further explanations on this matter, since this first distribution proposal has been rejected.
Related news
However, in the PP they insist that “institutional issues have never been negotiated to date based on the weight of the Table.” In this sense, they explain that the Socialists, together with Sumar, intended to use their majority in the Congress Table to approve a distribution that would disperse the conservative deputies so that they could not offer an image of unity in plenary sessions. Also part of the controversy is the site that occupies voxif it will be in the front row, relegating PP deputies to the so-called ‘chicken coop’ or if the ultras will end up on the upper benches, losing their current position.
“We know that five are more than four, – admit the conservatives about the composition of this body, which is the one that will have the last word on the distribution of seats – but also that 137 is more than 121“. In this regard, they claim to occupy a number of seats in the front row proportional to their parliamentary weight. In addition, they issue two warnings to the Socialists. The first, that they They could do the same in the Senate., where they have a majority in the Table. The second, that they would set a very dangerous precedent for future legislatures. The decision will surely be made next week, when the Board meets again.