There are those in the Valencian PP who are outraged these days by the methods that Génova has deployed regarding the future of the party in the Valencian Community. In reality, it has almost always been the norm. I say this in light of the uncertainty that has arisen due to Alberto Núñez Feijóo’s suspicious delay in confirming Juanfran Pérez Llorca’s candidacy for the 2027 regional elections. But when have the Valencian Popular Party members really had full autonomy to choose their leader?
Read more Search for housing in Valencia: “80 people contacted me in 24 hours to share a flat”
It is enough to look back. José Luis Olivas was appointed to replace Eduardo Zaplana when he began his term as minister in Madrid. Shortly after, Francisco Camps was chosen to succeed both Zaplana and Olivas as head of the Generalitat. Years later, Pablo Casado, with Teodoro García Egea as the main executor of the operation, removed Isabel Bonig to place Carlos Mazón at the head of the Valencian PP. The question, therefore, should not be why Génova decides, but when it stopped doing so.
It is true that there were moments when Valencian leaders accumulated enormous power of their own. Eduardo Zaplana did so when he left the mayoralty of Benidorm to conquer the Generalitat. At that time, the PP did not govern Spain, and he managed to build a solid network of political, economic, and media support in the Valencian Community until defeating the party’s reference figure, Pedro Agramunt. Francisco Camps also ended up consolidating a political authority that was hard to dispute after prevailing in the internal battle with the Zaplanista sector. His influence became decisive at the national congress held in Valencia in 2008, when Mariano Rajoy renewed the party leadership. But it is also worth remembering how that stage ended. It had to be the Gürtel case that precipitated his fall and Mariano Rajoy who, through Federico Trillo, forced his departure from the presidency of the Generalitat.
In all those episodes, with greater or lesser intensity, the national leadership ended up having the final say. That will to control the Valencian PP also responds to a certain political conception that goes back a long way. During the Transition and the first years of autonomy, the national leadership of the right understood that the Valencian Community was a strategic territory where it had to impose its own narrative against a Valencianist left that tried to build its own identity discourse. The so-called Battle of Valencia was the scene of that confrontation. And the role played by Unión Valenciana as an instrument to erode that political space until the PP itself ended up absorbing much of its electorate and discourse should not be forgotten either.
That is why it is surprising that some are now scandalized. Political memory sometimes lasts less than a news cycle. The relationship between Génova and the Valencian PP has been marked for decades by a succession of balances in which Madrid always reserved the capacity to decide. There were even moments when the political and media focus was almost exclusively on Valencian corruption while other plots affecting the Madrid PP remained in a discreet second plane. That image that corruption had its main stage in Valencia ended up becoming a narrative as effective as it was unfair.
Read more More child- and adolescent-friendly courts: «It’s about humanizing justice»
The problem is not that Génova wants to control the Valencian PP; that has always happened. The novelty is that it no longer even keeps up appearances, with the already known effects
That is why it should not be surprising that Génova now keeps the Valencian PP in suspense while deciding whether to confirm Juanfran Pérez Llorca or opt for another alternative. What is striking is not that the national leadership wants to maintain control. That has always happened. What is truly new is the naturalness with which it exercises that guardianship, hardly worrying about keeping up appearances. Territorial cadres, with only a few months left before the elections, need certainties. Instead, they receive silences, rumors, and tactical calculations. If Feijóo considers that Llorca is not the right candidate, he should name another. What is hard to understand is that a party aspiring to govern Spain keeps a regional organization in suspense for so long when it needs to organize its political strategy.
And it is also worth remembering that this way of acting is not exclusive to the PP. Ferraz did exactly the same when it decided that Diana Morant should become the new leader of the PSPV, ahead of Carlos Fernández Bielsa and Alejandro Soler. Later, the minister consolidated her position in a regional congress and strengthened her internal leadership. But the initial decision was also made in Madrid.
In the end, beyond ideological differences, PP and PSOE share the same party culture. The protagonists change and the acronyms change, but the center of gravity remains in the capital. Leaderships are decided there, narratives are built there, and timelines are set there. The difference is that before those decisions were wrapped in a certain organic liturgy. Today it does not even seem necessary to disguise it. The discussion is no longer about who decides, because that stopped being a mystery a long time ago. The real question is to what extent territorial parties are willing to accept that their political autonomy depends, almost always, on a call from Madrid.
Read more Only 13% of apartment purchases in Barcelona are made by companies or funds
