Portal de Alhama de Murcia

www.portaldealhama.com

• Home
• Business
• Hotels
• Restaurants
• News
• Advertisement

From the Popular Party as opposition party we are, we want to give voice to all those people in our town who feel discontent with the interpretation of the results of the so-called local consultation held in Alhama on March 9 to choose the location of the New institute Valle de Leiva.

And the reality is that NO VOTE 82% of those being over 16 were entitled to vote.

Why?

'About, because they believe that the government team is already legitimized enough to make the decisions to be taken without the need for consultations.

-Other Simply because they did not understand how to see through two questions, when I was supposed single question with three answers.

And others, because understanding it, have considered that it was a fraud, a conditional survey directed or directed to a particular purpose.

Also, we want here, ask the to be informed citizens cost has meant for the City conducting this consultation the government team, considering that has been advertised for consultation on regional media and local They have been made pamphlets, and has arranged several officials in the service of this survey.

Then, another thing that we criticize is that the councilors and the mayor himself engaged in leafleting City Council, in which the views of all political parties who desired and the educational community were collected;

we believe that all have more important that the realization of this work, which can make any other person or company responsibilities;

and if they did it was with partisan interests to show how workers are and what they care about alhameños save costs.

Again, lessons of demagoguery with photos included.

It was not a brochure PSOE but Alhama City Council as an institution.

And how to interpret the results is at least surprising;

New Espuña option to not exceed 50% of the votes (percentage is 25% for both ceramics and for PRAICO) is discarded in the first round;

and then people who preferred New Espuña, he retells his vote to the second question and added to the other two options.

That is, except those who voted YES to New Espuña and did not answer the second question, all other votes were added to the ceramic or PRAICO.

Is this fair?

Many democracy, a lot of participation, but the consultation has been clearly unfair and biased.

In addition, if not a consultation but a survey that, of course, is not legally binding but the Mayor and considers it morally.

Total, that some questions are made with the purpose of achieving a result that content itself to a minority of people with whom the current mayor promised in his day and now has not been able to say no.

Source: PP Alhama de Murcia