The left critiques the non-fulfilment of the promise to reduce the IGIC, while Vox questions the “acceptance” of maintaining an “antiquated” model.
SANTA CRUZ DE TENERIFE, Nov. 5 (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Minister of Finance for the Government of the Canary Islands, Matilde Asián, defended on Tuesday the safeguarding of public services as outlined in the 2025 regional budget amidst censure from leftist factions, who described the Executive as “apathetic” and “deceptive.”
During the bill’s presentation before the budget committee, she emphasised the financial “uncertainty” and growth restrictions embedded in the spending rule, set against a backdrop of diminished transfers and European funds.
The budget establishes a non-financial expenditure limit of 11,678.2 million euros, signifying an increase of 377 million euros compared to 2024, which equates to a rise of 3.3%. It allocates 7.2 euros of every ten to the social chapter.
The majority of spending will be directed towards Education, Health, and Social Services, with this year’s priorities also encompassing access to housing as a vital social requirement.
This results in the Canarian Health Service receiving an increase of 220 million euros, representing a growth of 5.04%. The Education budget rises by 2.93%, equating to an additional 61 million euros compared to the previous year, totalling 2,154 million euros. Meanwhile, the allocation for Social Welfare amounts to 762 million euros, nearly 59 million euros more, reflecting an increase of 8.37% from 2024.
Concerning housing, the Canary Housing Institute indicates a rise of 11.15%, amounting to 172 million euros.
The counsellor praised the implementation of deductions in personal income tax, identifying it as the “key tax” within the tax structure – the reduction of the IGIC from 7% to 5% has been postponed once more, with only adjustments made for sports activities – and incentives for the purchase and rental of housing. However, she acknowledged that income will grow at a “slower pace” next year due to less “robust” economic growth.
Indeed, she noted that of the 377 million euros in budget growth, only 140 million euros are set aside for new expenditures, as the remainder is allocated to cover the 5.3% rise in personnel costs.
Raúl Acosta (AHI) highlighted the “caution” observed in the budget preparation, considering that transfers are beginning to decline, and anticipated an “adjustment” in public spending due to the need to “begin repaying the debts accrued from the vast public resources used to confront the economic crisis resulting from the pandemic.”
In this vein, he stated that a “careful” approach is necessary as a period of “adjustments” is approaching in all public administrations, irrespective of “political affiliation”, whilst simultaneously appreciating the prioritisation of social items in a “new budgetary phase” that is emerging.
ASG: “RIGOROUS AND RESPONSIBLE” ACCOUNTS
Melodie Mendoza (ASG) expressed her approval that the Canarian Government has not prolonged the budgets and has opted for a new proposal despite the national and international “uncertainties” and the “slowdown” in economic development.
She characterised the accounts as being “rigorous and responsible,” prioritising the support of public services, including access to housing, and also acknowledged the “strengthening” of local corporations.
Javier Nieto (Vox) argued that the budget model is “obsolete” and consistently yields “the same results,” noting that substantial funds continue to be allocated to health, yet with only “marginal progress” achieved.
He cautioned that maintaining the welfare state could become a “problem,” recognising the “uncertainty,” and expressed confusion over the prevailing “acceptance” regarding budget formulation. “What this budget embodies is pure acceptance,” he remarked.
Esther González (NC-BC) noted that the budgets are “opaque, ambiguous, and poorly articulated,” representing a “clear neglect” of the primary sector, equality initiatives, hydraulic projects, and education.
She remarked that there is a “regression” in social areas and condemned the Government for “deceiving” citizens on its commitment to decrease the IGIC and taxes, further eliminating deductions aimed at combating inflation and the 99% tax incentive for professional fuel.
The Canary Islands representative expressed confusion over the Government’s reluctance to impose a tax on tourist stays for non-residents, arguing it could enhance the autonomous community’s revenues, and sarcastically commented that the spending rule, established by PP administrations, now constrains the operational capacity of the Canary Islands Government. “Be resolute,” she rebuked the counsellor.
Fernando Enseñat (PP) asserted that the primary focus of the budget is to sustain public services, housing included – boasting record figures – with nearly 1,000 million euros more than the most advantageous budget of the ‘Flower Pact,’ rebuking “the audacity” of the left for questioning the regional accounts.
He indicated that the budget isn’t expanding further due to “the Government of Pedro Sánchez,” which “remains inflexible with the spending rule,” appreciating that tax reductions through Personal Income Tax persist, in contrast to the left’s intention to impose a tax on overnight stays.
CC: “THE BUDGET THAT CAN BE MADE”
The spokesperson for the Nationalist Group, José Miguel Barragán, conveyed that the budget is focused on solving “citizens’ issues,” dedicating an additional 500 million euros to services than the Government of the ‘Flower Pact’.
He emphasised the “high uncertainty” involved in budgeting activities, particularly due to the US elections and how potential shifts in tariff policies with China could alter if Trump wins, impacting Europe.
In his view, this budget offers “certainty” to society and economic agents, reflecting “what can realistically be achieved under these conditions.”
Manuel Hernández (PSOE) described the budgets as “uninspired” and indicative of “resignation,” pointing to economic and fiscal strategies that “fail to satisfy” societal demands due to an “indifferent” Government, which exhibits “oscillations” while shunning its responsibilities. “This is a poor continuation of the 2024 budget,” he remarked.
He reproached the Executive for not taking “courageous measures,” merely recognising problems while retreating into a “fatalistic scenario” and “paralysis” that began this year, forecasting a budget under-execution exceeding 800 million euros.
He critiqued cuts in mobility policies, the fodder plan, cultural funding, non-contributory pensions, and assistance for dependency. “Courage is required to champion these budgets,” he stressed, underscoring that the current Government “relies on the revenues” of the ‘Flower Pact’ while maintaining an “erratic” fiscal policy that once again fails to fulfil the commitment to reduce the IGIC.
