Dawn

Dawn

Thursday, June 11, 2009

In British politics – in contrast to the more robust Spanish variety – no one ever bluntly calls anyone a liar. And certainly not in the parliament. But this commentator gets as close as one can to labelling Gordon Brown an inveterate economiser with the truth. My guess is the Spanish would see this British political norm as just another example of the core national sin of hypocrisy.

And talking of lying, The Economist said of President Zapatero’s Budget speech a few weeks ago that, while he’d pulled several rabbits out of his hat to confound the Opposition, he “must have known he could not fulfil his pledges, which seem to have been devised for the European election on June 7th.”. If so, his sleight-of-mouth was not terribly successful, for his party lost said elections.

I’ve often said I wouldn’t like to have the challenges of the Spanish President, given the fissiparous nature of politics here and the eternal campaigns from the regions to wrest ever more power from Madrid. The Economist refers to this in the above article, as well as to the constraints on the President’s ability to deliver on any promises he makes at a national level. Perhaps, in these circumstances, he has no option but to lie. Otherwise he’d just have to stay silent. Which is a tall order for a politician. Deaf ones I know of. But dumb ones?

As for eschewing hypocrisy and majoring on bluntness . . . I had lunch with some old Spanish friends yesterday. The wife very kindly volunteered that my Spanish had come on a long way but the husband retorted “No, he could still do better.” Being a gentleman, I didn’t mention his English. Because he hasn’t got any. Relating this to my to my elder daughter last night, she said it was a very Spanish trait to speak “without hairs on the tongue” . And she reminded me of two pupils she used to have in Pontevedra. The younger sister was much the taller one and when Faye commented on this she replied “Yes. People are always saying ‘How pretty your sister is! But you’re very tall.’” Poor kid.

After getting three speeding fines in one year – compared with none in the previous 43 – I’m naturally now taking a keen interest in the signs at the side of the road. And a confusing experience it is too. For instance, what to make of a sequence which goes – No sign at all for 3km after the start of a road; then an 80km sign; then (merely fifty metres later) a 50 sign? Or another sequence which goes – Firstly, an End of 60 sign, followed (a hundred metres later) by a 70 sign, followed (another hundred metres later) by a 50 sign Can they really be deliberately trying to confuse us? Can anyone tell me what the permitted speed is in the hundred metres between the End of 60 sign and the 70 sign in this second sequence? 80? 90? 100kph? I guess it's not 70 or 120.

Despite the fact the sun was forecast for today, I woke at 7 to an Atlantic Blanket that all but obscured the cityscape of Pontevedra several hundred metres below me. But by midday things had changed for the better and the warnings of very high temperatures for tomorrow began to look rather more credible. Now I’m worried about getting sunstroke at the cricket match on Saturday, rather than drowning. Don’t you just love this global warming.

Finally, here's an article on Galicia recently published in the Financial Times

No comments: