1) Zubieta will not be the first incinerator in Gipuzkoa, but the second: The Rezola cement factory burns waste in Añorga (Donostia-San Sebastián), although controls have recently been relaxed.

2) The damage that waste incineration may cause to human and environmental health will be the subject of debate, even if the authorities try to cover them up. In Donostialdea, the pollution that accumulates between two incinerators will be affected.

3) Anti-incineration doctors have informed people and groups such as GuraSOS have mobilized health-focused people, demanding children not to be left without protection. The leaders of the PNV-PSE have not admitted with them or with any other social or political force the possibility of discussing the plan.

4) Those who have become angry after the 2015 elections with the “PNV-PSE regime” have left a very important mark on how the PNV and PSE are governed by the imposition of the incinerator.

5) If the dismantling of the Zero Waste and Circular Economy strategy in Gipuzkoa started in 2015, the Zubieta incinerator can drown municipalities and models that still manage waste properly.

6) Municipalities that better manage waste will have to work hard to defend their model, first of all, of manipulations to present the results of the different models as if they were “uniform”. In waste management there are technical standards for measuring results in quantity and quality, more precise than political concepts such as “consensus”.

7) In the 2011-2015 legislature, the contrast and public debate between the waste plan of the Bildu leaders and the recently restored PNV and PSE plan has not been approved. But media noise cannot cover the truth: the alternative exists and exists.

(8) At a time when calls are being made for the re-publication of privatized public services, the Gipuzkoa authorities are going to take a fair opposite path, to privatize the public. How will they react in their ELA, LAB, CCOO and other programmes that refer to publishing and municipalities?

9) The leaders of the PNV and the PSE are generating in these months an illegitimate public debt until 2051, which is added to that generated in 2011 with toxic swaps. Will left-wing parties have any special reaction? The social movements that deal with the consequences of the precariousness caused by neoliberalism?

10) When municipalities have historically had competence in waste management, they are suffering from a significant loss of capacity and sovereignty in Gipuzkoa, to the extent that private companies are permanently left with the competences voluntarily handed over to the communities through the GHK. If the right to decide on waste is not in our hands, who will make us believe that political sovereignty is in our hands?

11) Municipalities through the communities are responsible for the decisions of the GHK. After several movements, a single town hall in Gipuzkoa has not decided to leave these communities. Since non-exit is also a decision, are the representatives of the municipalities aware that they assume the responsibilities of the commitments undertaken by GHK until 2051?

(12) It is known that policy, including the municipal policy, is managed by the apparatus of political parties. Will municipalities, as representatives of citizenship, explain to citizens the details of these contracts that will limit budgets until 2051? Or do the parties take over the responsibilities and explanations?

13) Democratic confrontation versus consensual and consensual solutions, or the need to choose one or the other, also in the case of Gipuzkoa waste: The unilateral strategy of the PNV and PSE has shown the sterility of the former.

14) Associations and anti-incineration movements have so far failed to lead the authorities to a comprehensive dialogue and the decisions of the PSE and PNV leaders have de facto implemented them. How will your strategy change in the coming months?