Zaragoza, 1 de septiembre de 2008. El Boletín Oficial de Aragón incluía el pasado jueves 28 de agosto seis resoluciones del Director Gerente de la Entidad Aragonesa de Servicios Telemáticos, ofertando diferentes puestos de trabajo, para selección de personal laboral con contrato indefinido de la citada Entidad. Igualmente, el domingo se insertaba un anuncio oficial en Heraldo de Aragón dando publicidad a tales ofertas de selección.
Esta Asociación se ve obligada con ello a insistir en que estas convocatorias no se ajustan a la legalidad, pues la selección del personal fijo de nuevo ingreso de las entidades de derecho público, como es el caso de Aragonesa de Servicios Telemáticos, entidad dependiente del Departamento de Ciencia, Tecnología y Universidad, sólo puede efectuarse dentro del marco de la Oferta de Empleo Público aprobada anualmente por el Gobierno de Aragón, tal y como se desprende de los artículos 2 y 70 del Estatuto Básico del Empleado Público.
Esta Asociación ya formuló en una ocasión anterior recurso de alzada contra una resolución similar de la entidad Aragonesa de Servicios Telemáticos, siendo inadmitido dicho recurso por la actual titular del Departamento, alegando falta de legitimación activa.
Asimismo, la Asociación ha impugnado procesos de selección de otras entidades de derecho público de la Administración aragonesa, como es el caso del Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud o de la Corporación Aragonesa de Radio y Televisión. Precisamente, en este último caso, y por tratarse de una entidad adscrita al Departamento de Presidencia, responsable de velar por la aplicación de la normativa de función pública, se optó por plantear recurso contencioso-administrativo contra la desestimación del recurso de alzada, con el objeto de provocar un pronunciamiento judicial sobre la obligatoriedad de someter la selección del personal laboral fijo de las entidades de derecho público a lo determinado por la Oferta de Empleo Público que apruebe el Gobierno de Aragón.
Una vez más, y aun sabiendo o imaginando la suerte que han de correr los escritos de recurso que se promuevan, esta Asociación impugnará ante el Departamento de Ciencia, Tecnología y Universidad las convocatorias realizadas por el Director Gerente de la entidad Aragonesa de Servicios Telemáticos, pues frente a la contumacia de la Administración en la vulneración de las normas no cabe desistimiento en la defensa de la legalidad, aunque pueda parecer una acción meramente testimonial.
Like the battle of Waterloo, the battle for Scotland was a damn close-run thing. The effects of Thursday’s no vote are enormous – though not as massive as the consequences of a yes would have been.
The vote against independence means, above all, that the 307-year Union survives. It therefore means that the UK remains a G7 economic power and a member of the UN security council. It means Scotland will get more devolution. It means David Cameron will not be forced out. It means any Ed Miliband-led government elected next May has the chance to serve a full term, not find itself without a majority in 2016, when the Scots would have left. It means the pollsters got it right, Madrid will sleep a little more easily, and it means the banks will open on Friday morning as usual.
But the battlefield is still full of resonant lessons. The win, though close, was decisive. It looks like a 54%-46% or thereabouts. That’s not as good as it looked like being a couple of months ago. But it’s a lot more decisive than the recent polls had hinted. Second, it was women who saved the union. In the polls, men were decisively in favour of yes. The yes campaign was in some sense a guy thing. Men wanted to make a break with the Scotland they inhabit. Women didn’t. Third, this was to a significant degree a class vote too. Richer Scotland stuck with the union — so no did very well in a lot of traditonal SNP areas. Poorer Scotland, Labour Scotland, slipped towards yes, handing Glasgow, Dundee and North Lanarkshire to the independence camp. Gordon Brown stopped the slippage from becoming a rout, perhaps, but the questions for Labour — and for left politics more broadly — are profound.
For Scots, the no vote means relief for some, despair for others, both on the grand scale. For those who dreamed that a yes vote would take Scots on a journey to a land of milk, oil and honey, the mood this morning will be grim. Something that thousands of Scots wanted to be wonderful or merely just to witness has disappeared. The anticlimax will be cruel and crushing. For others, the majority, there will be thankfulness above all but uneasiness too. Thursday’s vote exposed a Scotland divided down the middle and against itself. Healing that hurt will not be easy or quick. It’s time to put away all flags.
The immediate political question now suddenly moves to London. Gordon Brown promised last week that work will start on Friday on drawing up the terms of a new devolution settlement. That may be a promise too far after the red-eyed adrenalin-pumping exhaustion of the past few days. But the deal needs to be on the table by the end of next month. It will not be easy to reconcile all the interests – Scots, English, Welsh, Northern Irish and local. But it is an epochal opportunity. The plan, like the banks, is too big to fail.
Alex Salmond and the SNP are not going anywhere. They will still govern Scotland until 2016. There will be speculation about Salmond’s position, and the SNP will need to decide whether to run in 2016 on a second referendum pledge. More immediately, the SNP will have to decide whether to go all-out win to more Westminster seats in the 2015 general election, in order to hold the next government’s feet to the fire over the promised devo-max settlement. Independence campaigners will feel gutted this morning. But they came within a whisker of ending the United Kingdom on Thursday. One day, perhaps soon, they will surely be back.
(Artículo de Martin Kettle, publicado en "The Guardian" el 19 de septiembre de 2014)
2 comentarios:
Doscientas treinta notas lleva ya publicadas este blog, lo que no está nada mal, al margen de los resultados que puedan tener, pero habría que dinamizar algo más los espacios de comentarios, en mi opini´´on.
¿Estamos luchando contra molinos de viento?
Publicar un comentario