1987 vote of no confidence in the government of Felipe González

A motion of no confidence in the Spanish government of Felipe González was debated and voted in the Congress of Deputies between 26 and 30 March 1987. It was brought by People's Alliance (AP) leader Antonio Hernández Mancha, motivated on the "deteriorating situation of the country" as a result of the social conflict sparked throughout the 1986–87 winter.[1][2] However, the motion's true motives were attributed to Mancha's need for public promotion as both AP and opposition leader after his recent election to the post, as well as to his party's perceived urge to vindicate its primacy within the centre-right political spectrum in Spain amid the internal crisis that had been beleaguering it in the previous months.[3][4][5]

1987 vote of no confidence in the government of Felipe González
Prime Minister Felipe González (left) and Deputy Prime Minister Alfonso Guerra (right) in their seats during the debate on the motion of no confidence on 26 March 1987.
Date26–30 March 1987
LocationCongress of Deputies, Spain
CauseThe social conflict throughout the 1986–87 winter and the election of Antonio Hernández Mancha as new People's Alliance (AP) leader.
Participants
OutcomeMotion rejected.

It was soundly defeated, never having had any real prospects of succeeding as a result of the ruling Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) commanding an absolute majority of seats in the Congress. It secured the support of only AP and Valencian Union (UV)—67 votes at the time—and the opposition of the PSOE, United Left (IU), the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV), Basque Country Left (EE) and Canarian Independent Groups (AIC)—194 votes—with most other parties abstaining and many deputies not attending the vote at all.[6][7] Having been unable to secure any significant support outside of his group, harshly criticized by other opposition parties and seeing some notorious gaffes during his speech,[8][9] political commentators promptly came to regard the motion as a huge political blow for Hernández Mancha's career,[10][11] who ultimately ended up retiring from politics in 1989.[12]

Background

The conservative People's Coalition had broken up following disappointing results in the 1986 Spanish general election: first with the splitting of the People's Democratic Party (PDP) in July 1986,[13] then with the Liberal Party (PL) following suit in January 1987.[14][15] Dissensions within the People's Alliance had also seen the splitting of Jorge Verstrynge and Carlos Manglano in October to form the Democratic Renewal party (RD), and of Gabriel Camuñas and Carlos Ruiz Soto into the Democratic Party (PD) in December.[16][17][18]

Concurrently, following the electoral defeat in the Basque regional election held in November that same year, Manuel Fraga resigned as AP leader on 1 December, being replaced by Antonio Hernández Mancha—until then the leader of the party in Andalusia—on 7 February.[19] However, by the time of Mancha's election his party's parliamentary group in the Congress of Deputies had been reduced to 67 members out of the 105 that the People's Coalition had secured in the 1986 election.[9] Coupled to this was the fact that Hernández Mancha was not a deputy himself but a senator—preventing him, among other things, from engaging Felipe González directly in the State of the Nation Debate of 1987—meaning that he was having difficulties in reaching out to the general public as leader of the opposition.[1][12] Finally, Fraga's resignation had prompted former prime minister Adolfo Suárez and his Democratic and Social Centre (CDS) party to attempt an electoral expansion at the expense of AP in the upcoming 1987 local, regional and European Parliament elections, ultimately envisaging the former overcoming the latter as the main opposition party in Spain.[9]

The Spanish Constitution of 1978 required for motions of no confidence to be proposed by at least one-tenth of the Congress of Deputies—35 out of 350. Following the German model, votes of no confidence in Spain were constructive, so the motion was required to include an alternative candidate for prime minister.[5][20] For a motion of no confidence to be successful, it had to be passed by an absolute majority in the Congress of Deputies. A minimum period of five days from the motion's registration (dubbed as "cooling period") was required to pass before it could come up for a vote, but no maximum was established. Other parties were entitled to submit alternative motions within the first two days from the registration.[21][22]

1. The Congress of Deputies may challenge Government policy by passing a motion of censure by an absolute majority of its members.
2. The motion of censure must be proposed by at least one tenth of the Deputies, including a candidate for the office of President of the Government.
3. The motion of censure may not be voted on until five days after it has been submitted. During the first two days of this period, alternative motions may be submitted.
4. If the motion of censure is not passed by the Congress, its signatories may not submit another during the same session.

— Article 113 of the Spanish Constitution[23]

Concurrently, the Prime Minister was barred from dissolving the Cortes Generales and calling a general election while a motion of no confidence was pending. If the motion was successful, the incumbent prime minister and his/her government were required to submit their resignation to the Monarch, while the candidate proposed in the motion was automatically considered to have the confidence of the Congress of Deputies and immediately appointed as prime minister. If unsuccessful, the signatories of the motion were barred from submitting another during the same session.[22][23]

The procedure for motions of no confidence was regulated within Articles 175 to 179 of the Standing Orders of the Congress of Deputies, which provided for the debate on the motion starting with its defence by one of the signatory members without any time limitations, to be followed by an also time-unlimited speech by the nominated candidate to explain his/her political programme. Subsequently, spokespeople from the different parliamentary groups in Congress were allowed to speak for thirty minutes, with an opportunity to reply or rectify themselves for ten minutes. Members of the government were allowed to take the floor and speak at any time of their request during the debate.[24]

Opinion polls
Opinion on the motion of no confidence
Polling firm/Commissioner Fieldwork date Sample size Support Reject Neither ?
CIS[p 1] 1–2 Apr 1987 2,505 22.0 44.0 N/A 34.0
Diario 16[5] 29 Mar 1987 ? 25.5 50.5 N/A 24.0

Events

Prelude and debate

The motion was officially registered on 23 March 1987 by fifty-one People's Alliance (AP) deputies and with Antonio Hernández Mancha as the proposed candidate, based on the following six motives: "poor functioning of state services", "ineffective economic management", "ineffectiveness and inadequacy of the Central Administration", "erratic foreign and defense policy", "hegemonic and interventionist attitude of the State" and "absence of proper channels for dialogue with social movements"; the latter was attributed to the ongoing social conflict between González's government and trade unions—including the Workers' General Union (UGT)—since the end of 1986 and into the spring of 1987.[1][25] The initiative was criticized by several parties, including the ruling Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE), because of the motion's mathematical impossibility of succeeding as a result of the latter commanding an absolute majority in the Congress of Deputies, while also being dubbed as an opportunistic exercise of political self-promotion because of the close proximity of the 1987 local and regional elections.[26]

The debate's schedule was set for 26–27 March, whereas the vote itself was not expected to take place until after the weekend, on 30 March, in order to respect the five-day timetable set down by the Constitution. This was the first and—to date—only time that the vote on a motion of no confidence in Spain would not be held immediately after the debate.[21] AP's spokesperson in Congress Juan Ramón Calero had advocated for the debate to be postponed to next week so as not to interrupt the "unity of act" between the debate and the vote, but the government pushed through its own schedule thanks to its parliamentary majority. This led Calero to claim that this had been done "so as to cast off the feeling of censorship that our initiative implies", but he reluctantly accepted it so as to not give the impression that Hernández Mancha needed more time for preparation. The CDS, the PDP, United Left (IU) and the Regionalist Aragonese Party (PAR) supported the view that the debate and the vote should respect the unity of act of the parliamentary meeting, whereas Convergence and Union (CiU) had been favourable to the debate being held as early as possible, with the latter stance being the one that prevailed.[5][8]

In his defense of the motion previous to Mancha's speech as candidate on 26 March, Calero argued on the motion's motives that "in the case of a single-party with an absolute majority in the chamber, the motion of no confidence fulfills other subsidiary purposes which were the ones aimed for by this group [...] what we were trying to show with this motion was the Government's inability to deal with the serious problems facing our country". After laying out his programme, Hernández Mancha was received with widespread criticism from other parties: those in opposition condemned AP's attitude of not having reached out to them previously to ask for their support to the motion, whereas González's government remained mostly silent in the first day of debate—except for the formal reply to the speeches by Calero and Mancha, which was borne to deputy prime minister Alfonso Guerra—allegedly "out of respect for the other spokespeople", but in reality because of considering that the one being examined was Hernández Mancha and not themselves.[27][28] In his reply, Guerra mocked Mancha by dubbing his speech as "the discourse of the old, reactionary right, clothed in populism".[29]

In the second day of debate, Prime Minister Felipe González took the floor to disapprove of Mancha's performance and criticize his alleged contradictions, the "lack of consistency" of his programme and "the insufficient information" that he had collected on the issues addressed in his speeches.[30] The replies from AP's leader were notorious because of a number of gaffes: a first one in which he erroneusly claimed that then-foreign minister Francisco Fernández Ordóñez had been a cabinet member under Adolfo Suárez during the censure motion of May 1980—Fernández Ordóñez had not been appointed to the cabinet until September that year—and another one when he mistakenly attributed to Saint Teresa of Jesus a quote from Lope de Vega when addressing the CDS parliamentary group and Suárez himself, which forced the latter—who had initially rejected to participate in the debate[31]—to take the floor himself to refute it, as well as to reject the alleged political motivation of the motion.[9][32][33]

The motion was defeated by an overwhelming margin, with just 67 votes in favour—those of AP and Valencian Union (UV)—194 against and 71 abstentions, with 18 absentees (including the 5 members of Herri Batasuna who had not taken their seats).[34][35] Several of the opposition parties were in disagreement with the government's policy and González's management of the country, but their level of dissatisfaction was not such so as to openly support Mancha's investiture as alternative prime minister, prompting many of these parties to abstain instead.[5] The supportive stance of UV's only member in Congress also led to discomfort setting among the more moderate and centrist sectors within the party, which had unsuccessfully advocated for an abstention in the vote.[36] The refusal of the PDP and PL to support the motion—the latter of which had taken the decision that same day, on the grounds that it had been tabled untimely and unilaterally—prompted a AP to break up all relations with these two parties in the short term.[37][38]

Vote
Motion of no confidence
Antonio Hernández Mancha (AP)
Ballot → 30 March 1987
Required majority → 176 out of 350 N
67 / 350
194 / 350
71 / 350
18 / 350
Sources[34][35][39][40][lower-alpha 1]

Aftermath

Antonio Hernández Mancha regarded the motion and the vote as a success in "consolidating [AP] as the sole alternative of government",[41][42] even not ruling out the tabling of future, similar motions in each parliamentary session.[34] However, the opportunity of it, Mancha's lackluster performance in the debate and his oversized defeat—including the refusal from AP's erstwhile allies (PDP and PL) or that of its split members (RD and PD) to back him—would go down in history as a massive political blunder that, ultimately, would cost him his political career.[43][44]

Among the factors said to contribute to Hernández Mancha's failing to secure any political gain from the debate were that he was a newcomer to national politics—having been appointed as AP leader barely two months earlier—the fact that the ruling PSOE rushed the debate on the motion to the earliest possible date allowed under law (meaning that Mancha had little time to prepare himself), leading to the well-experienced Felipe González and Alfonso Guerra to—in the words of some media—"toy" with him,[5][45] and that the prime minister himself chose to not intervene until the second day of debating, leaving Mancha isolated and his speech exposed to the panning of other parties while depriving him of the parliamentary duel he sought.[46] From that point, movements were set in motion within his party to replace him as leader, ultimately seeing Manuel Fraga forcing him out of politics in January 1989 and prompting the refoundation of AP—together with the PDP and PL—into the People's Party (PP) that same month.[6][47][48]

However, another of the interpretations on the motion's consequences was that it was partly successful in allowing AP to recover the political initiative ahead of the June 1987 local and regional elections, where the party held out as the main opposition force in Spain despite the electoral growth of the CDS. Later on, Hernández Mancha would reveal that he had not tabled the motion against González, but against Suárez, weary that the right-wing electorate could succumb to tactical voting in favour of the latter—much more widely known and popular than himself—as a result of the political vacuum left by Fraga's resignation.[49] In any case, the 1987 motion has come to go down in the recent history of Spain in contraposition to the 1980 one, as the exemplification of the political risks than an ill-fated vote of no confidence can entail for the candidate tabling it.[6][50]

Notes
  1. The Journal of Sessions of the Congress summarizes the motion's results as 66 support votes, 195 against and 71 abstentions, a count which is replicated by several media outlets. However, the manual count of the deputies picking each choice as per de Journal itself gives a 67–194–71 result instead.

References
Opinion poll sources
  1. "Estudio C.I.S. nº 1.618. "Debate de la moción de censura" (Abril 1987)" (PDF). CIS (in Spanish). 2 April 1987.
Other
  1. Díez, Anabel; Valdecantos, Camilo (24 March 1987). "Hernández Mancha presenta una moción de censura para lograr el 'cuerpo a cuerpo' con Felipe González". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  2. Brunet, José María (24 March 1987). "El presidente González minimiza la moción de censura que ayer le presentó Alianza Popular". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  3. "Así fueron las cuestiones de confianza y mociones de censura de la Democracia". El Mundo (in Spanish). Madrid. EFE. 25 May 2011. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  4. Martínez Concejo, Ana (13 June 2017). "Las otras mociones de censura de la democracia española" (in Spanish). Madrid: Cadena SER. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  5. Vírgala Foruria, Eduardo (1 April 1988). "La moción de censura de marzo de 1987: segunda práctica aplicativa del artículo 113 de la Constitución". Revista de las Cortes Generales (in Spanish) (13): 159–177. doi:10.33426/rcg/1988/13/324. ISSN 0213-0130. Retrieved 30 July 2020.
  6. Julve, Rafa (13 June 2017). "Así contó la prensa las mociones de censura a Adolfo Suárez y Felipe González". El Periódico de Catalunya (in Spanish). Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  7. Pelayo, Francisco (29 July 2020). "¿Cuántas mociones de censura ha habido en la democracia española contra el Gobierno? Solo una ha tenido éxito". 20 minutos (in Spanish). Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  8. Díez, Anabel; Valdecantos, Camilo (25 March 1987). "Gobierno y PSOE consideran que la moción de censura servirá a González para demostrar que no está acosado". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  9. Lamata, Juan Francisco (30 May 2018). "Archivo Bumerán: La moción de Mancha y la pifia de Santa Teresa de Jesús" (in Spanish). COPE. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  10. García de Blas, Elsa (19 May 2017). "Iglesias admite los "enormes riesgos" de presentar una moción que no va a prosperar". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 20 May 2017.
  11. Rubio, Angélica (30 May 2018). "La cuarta moción de censura de la Democracia y las tres anteriores fracasaron". El Plural (in Spanish). Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  12. "Antonio Hernández Mancha, la prehistoria del PP". El Periódico de Catalunya (in Spanish). 24 April 2016. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  13. González Ibañez, Juan (22 July 1986). "Alianza Popular anuncia la ruptura de los pactos políticos y electorales con el PDP de Óscar Alzaga". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  14. González Ibañez, Juan; Jáuregui, Fernando (13 January 1987). "Los 19 parlamentarios liberales deciden pasar al Grupo Mixto". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  15. "Los parlamentarios del Partido Liberal pedirán mañana su paso al Grupo Mixto". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. 18 January 1987. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  16. "Camuñas, Olarra y Ruiz Soto crean el Partido Demócrata". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. 21 December 1986. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  17. Jáuregui, Fernando (6 January 1987). "Dos concepciones para lanzar la 'operación UCD'". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  18. Lozano, Carles. "Cambios de grupo parlamentario 1986-1989". Electoral History (in Spanish). Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  19. Jáuregui, Fernando (8 February 1987). "Hernández Mancha venció por holgada mayoría a Herrero en el congreso extraordinario de AP". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 1 April 2018.
  20. Torres Muro, Ignacio (9 October 2017). "La moción de censura constructiva. Una respuesta alemana, y española, a la inestabilidad gubernamental". Foro: Revista de ciencias jurídicas y sociales, Nueva época (in Spanish). 20 (1): 279–292. doi:10.5209/FORO.57537. ISSN 1698-5583. Retrieved 30 July 2020.
  21. Santaolalla López, Fernando; Galindo Elola-Olaso, Fernando; Miranda, Luis Manuel (2018). "Constitución española, Sinopsis artículo 113". Congress of Deputies (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  22. "Un arma parlamentaria que precisa de mayoría absoluta". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. 24 March 1987. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  23. "The Spanish Constitution" (PDF). Official Gazette of the State. Retrieved 25 May 2018.
  24. "Standing Orders of the Congress of Deputies" (PDF). Congress of Deputies. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  25. Brunet, José María (24 March 1987). "Mancha provoca el enfrentamiento con González". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  26. González Ibañez, Juan (24 March 1987). "El presidente del Ejecutivo acoge con escasa sorpresa la iniciativa de AP". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  27. "Antonio Hernández Mancha fue descalificado por la oposición sin necesidad de que interviniera el Gobierno". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. 27 March 1987. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  28. "González asegura que no intervino por respeto a los otros portavoces". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. 27 March 1987. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  29. "Guerra desautoriza los argumentos de AP para una moción de censura presentada destiempo". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Madrid. Agencias. 27 March 1987. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  30. González Ibañez, Juan; Valdecantos, Camilo (28 March 1987). "Hernández Mancha logró el 'cuerpo a cuerpo' con González, quien le acusó de incoherencia e ignorancia". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  31. González Ibañez, Juan (26 March 1987). "Suárez renuncia a intervenir en el debate entre el líder de AP y Felipe González". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  32. "El líder de AP obligó a Suárez con un verso a subir a la tribuna". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. 28 March 1987. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  33. Unzueta, Patxo (28 March 1987). "Los deslices de sus señorías". El País (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  34. Díez, Anabel (31 March 1987). "Hernández Mancha no descarta que AP presente una moción de censura cada periodo de sesiones". El País (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  35. "Sesión Plenaria núm. 39, celebrada el lunes, 30 de marzo de 1987" (PDF). Diario de Sesiones del Congreso de Diputados (in Spanish) (40): 2323–2327. 30 March 1987. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  36. Villena, Miguel Ángel (1 April 1987). "Malestar en Unión Valenciana por el apoyo a la moción de censura". El País (in Spanish). Valencia. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  37. Brunet, José María (31 March 1987). "Hernández Mancha y AP, tal y como se esperaba, se quedan solos ante el Gobierno". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  38. Brunet, José María (31 March 1987). "AP da por dinamitados los puentes con el PDP y el PL". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  39. Lozano, Carles. "Congreso de los Diputados: Votaciones más importantes". Electoral History (in Spanish). Retrieved 29 July 2020.
  40. Lozano, Carles. "Presidentes del Gobierno: Votaciones de investidura, mociones de confianza, mociones de censura, aprobación de la Constitución". Electoral History (in Spanish). Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  41. Díez, Anabel (28 March 1987). "Hernández Mancha: "Cuando he salido del Congreso, la gente me ha hecho palmas"". El País (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  42. Díez, Anabel (31 March 1987). "El candidato no quiere una saeta". El País (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  43. Garea, Fernando (12 June 2017). "Tercera moción de censura imposible". El País (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  44. De la Riva, Elena (31 May 2018). "La primera moción de censura de la democracia española cumple 38 años". Heraldo de Aragón (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  45. Valenzuela, Curri (31 May 2017). "Tan ridículo como Mancha". ABC (in Spanish). Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  46. Brunet, José María (27 March 1987). "El silencio de González desarma un novel Mancha". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  47. B. García, Luis (27 April 2017). "La tercera moción de censura en democracia que tampoco tendrá éxito". La Vanguardia (in Spanish). Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  48. Blay, Juan Antonio (12 June 2017). "Otras mociones de censura sin visos de prosperar que cambiaron el rumbo de la política en España". Público (in Spanish). Madrid. Retrieved 31 July 2020.
  49. Hernández Mancha, Antonio (17 June 2017). "El "dedo" de Fraga y la moción de censura". ABC (in Spanish). Retrieved 2 August 2020.
  50. Mohorte (27 April 2017). "Para qué sirve una moción de censura: del auge de Felipe González a la caída de Hernández Mancha". Magnet (in Spanish). Retrieved 2 August 2020.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.