Zaragoza, 22 de septiembre de 2008.
La Sala de lo Contencioso-Administrativo, Sección 2ª, del Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Aragón ha admitido a trámite el recurso contencioso-administrativo promovido por la Asociación contra resolución del Director General de la Corporación Aragonesa de Radio y Televisión. En dicha resolución se convocaba la selección de personal laboral fijo, sin contar con autorización en la Oferta de Empleo Público que corresponde aprobar el Gobierno de Aragón, tal y como exige el Estatuto Básico del Empleado Público, al incluir expresamente en su ámbito de aplicación a las entidades de Derecho público de las distintas Administraciones Públicas, siendo precisamente la citada Corporación una entidad de Derecho público adscrita al Departamento de Presidencia.
Dicha convocatoria ya fue objeto de recurso de alzada ante el Consejero de Presidencia, Javier Velasco, quien optó por inadmitirlo, alegando la falta de legitimación de la Asociación para formular tal recurso, por carecer, en su opinión, de interés legítimo, expresando igualmente la imposibilidad de revisar, en vía administrativa, decisiones de entes públicos sujetos al Derecho privado.
El órgano judicial ha requerido asimismo a la Diputación General de Aragón para que remita el correspondiente expediente administrativo, al objeto de que la Asociación, a la vista del mismo, pueda formular su escrito de demanda.
Esta Asociación, incapaz de llevar a los Tribunales todas y cada una de las convocatorias irregulares efectuadas por el conjunto de entidades y empresas públicas de la Comunidad Autónoma, dada la limitación de sus medios, ha considerado el caso de la Corporación Aragonesa de Radio y Televisión como supuesto especialmente representativo, por tratarse de una entidad adscrita al Departamento de Presidencia y ser este Departamento el responsable de asegurar el cumplimiento de la normativa de función pública en el conjunto de la Administración autonómica.
Confiamos en que la resolución judicial que dicte el Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Aragón pueda marcar un punto de inflexión en el actual estado de inaplicación del Estatuto Básico por parte de los responsables de los diferentes entes públicos de la Comunidad Autónoma.
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)
