2016–2020, 4 years, not a short time, gives the opportunity to do everything. There is a broad consensus that this legislature has been very inadequate, that few laws have been passed in Parliament. If we ask ourselves what is that of the “resolution of the consequences of the conflict”, I do not know, I do not know, I suspect that the institutional activity around the victims has not been so scarce (being an eternal starting point that is still more for some victims than for all the victims), but in that other more current and alive aspect of the conflict, that of the prisoners, is a sad echo (annoying for some).

There have been opportunities. You know, I haven't ignored who has the keys to the jails. The Basque Government or the Gasteiz Parliament cannot be held responsible for the prisoners not returning home (and even for the prisoners following hundreds of kilometres away). Responsibility is shared here, and everyone has a responsibility. But there have been occasions. The EPPK, which brings together the largest group of Basque political prisoners, ended its debate in autumn 2017. Clear effects. Acknowledging that dismissal will occur progressively or, to a large extent, individually (but attention: collective dismissal), clarifying the limits to the adoption of the law (no ideological repentance, not delation) and implementing. And a deep, elegant and pretty empathetic analytical attitude with the consequences of the armed struggle.

How have the institutions responded to the offer of this large group of Basque prisoners? Forgiveness, nuance: Is it possible to differentiate the political affiliation of the institutions and the specific people who run them? In other words: Is it appropriate, necessary, to separate statements by an institutional person – and his own interventions – from the position of the political party in which he participates?

It's been 10 years since ETA's last armed action. The posture and the temple on one side is evident. However, on the other side there are some expressions, yes, a few movements, yes, but there is something that needs to be changed in the root, because, if not, the steps can be too slow. “They still have a long way to go,” “They are not yet fully approved,” “They have just reached the road we have been showing them some time ago.” An organisation can make mere formal, cheap statements if it can argue that competences are not theirs and has no will to make an extraordinary effort outside its competences. But if the person who makes those statements that may be correct in the contents (or their partisan alter ego) maintains an ideological vindictive, hateful, cursory or irresponsible position, we are not going well. We're not going well and we're going too slow, because there are people in prison who can't take too long.

The institutions must protect the rights of citizens within their scope of protection. Sometimes it seems that the Basque Government has done more for Pablo Ibar than for those 230 citizens who can see there, at the tip of the nose. As long as there are partisan interests, revenge, laziness or whatever, we are not doing well. Madrid has the keys, yes, but the will of Madrid is not made up by itself. Everyone has the ability to push. Institutions too. And the parties that support these institutions, even more so.