Corruption "tolerable"

Most people around the world believe that corruption is inherent in political activity, as revealed by the surveys.

Europe, of course, is not like Bangladesh, Nigeria and Haiti, countries at the forefront of bribes and other crimes of this type. But it is also not immune. Andreotti's Italy experienced the sensational case of P-2 lodge and Banco Ambrosiano. In Mitterrand's France, the monkey business of his friend Pierre Bérégovoy led him to suicide, and the company mangoneo Elf jail cost the former Foreign Minister Roland Dumas. More recently we have known the Lord and sale of securities during the British Mandate of Tony Blair and the scandal of dozens of members to decorate their account attached to Members' allowances.

In Spain, after the false invoices Filesa was funded with the PSOE in 1989, came the fees charged Naseiro Rosendo, treasurer of the PP, the diversion of funds by the party Pallarols case Duran i Lleida, equipment grants slot of the PNV, and so forth.

As all parties were equally involved and there was no police legal instruments or means to fix things, most of these and other stories have been watered down. Until now.

Also, I must say, our culture and our habits have always been lenient with petty corruption. Who has not asked for the recommendation for a child in a test? Or work for a plug-in-law? Or interested received Christmas gifts?

But that's all volcanic chump change. In contrast, real estate balls the last two decades have led some pockets illegally obtained hundreds of millions: he called "3 percent" already in 1991 naively sought to eradicate the then Minister Josep Borrell, the same percentage that fourteen years later criticized Artur Mas Maragall that his party had and has now led to the systematic looting of the Palau de la Música by Félix Millet.

Those powders brought this mud. What until recently were considered by the public fraud "tolerable" have ceased to be. Where is the line of what is permissible? Where does the rascals acceptable and punishable begins?

There is nothing objective, since it depends on the ideology, prejudice and the perception of each person. So no matter what they decide at the time the courts, the charges against Fabra, Camps, Ripoll, ... for some irrefutable evidence of his guilt, while others are shady maneuvers by his political enemies. But how can they ask sensible people from outside the Community, which is falling all the polls continue to give the PP an absolute majority voting?

It's simple: by the surfeit of Valencia from the disastrous policies that consider Zapatero regarding their interests. While this perception prevails over any other, nor Jorge Alart or who may replace him has nothing to do politically. Only if you impose a sense that corruption is real and has crossed the "red line" will be a political change. Otherwise, everything that happens in this area not only have no negative political impact it can have a boomerang effect of strengthening its protagonists.