As is well known, the CAPV Department of Education has developed a pact that forms the basis of an Education Act. The aim has been from the very beginning to perpetuate the current dual educational system and to guarantee the future of the private network, as the education employers demanded a long time ago. In this regard, and in view of the drastic drop in the birth rate, it is clear that the Department ' s policy will have serious consequences for public education and for the future of the workers working there. In fact, the pact to lay the foundations of the Education Law does not give public schools a central place they should have in the educational system, nor is it prioritized over private ownership centers. In other words, the educational pact developed by the Department of Education and supported by most political parties calls into question the future of public education staff. An example of these educational policies is the reality of Amurrio, where while the line is closed in the public school, private centers are engaged with public money to keep them open.

As the Department of Education developed the foundations of the concert, as if it were a two-headed snake, he talked to the unions about his commitment to keep the current staff. Although we are aware of the contradictions of this attitude, as workers’ representatives, we have never given up on negotiation and have struggled to find loopholes that benefit the education system on all occasions when we have been granted a place.

We have often been caricatured for demonstrating our opposition in this struggle. Unfortunately, there are still those who, fearing confrontation, do not have the positive and constructive skills that they have. Or that is the same, that it is not able to accept the discrepancies.

As a result of these negotiations and struggles, the Department has presented us with a document that rearranges staffing or resources. The document has lights and shadows. On the one hand, there will be more resources for the centres and many of them will become structural. On the other hand, there is a deepening of the autonomy of potentially dangerous centres or in the leadership of management, with uncertainty as to the way in which some resources are to be allocated (contracts programme, for example).

If the will of the Department of Education were to improve the quality of public education, it would apply these resources unilaterally, as it always does. On this occasion, however, the arrival of these resources is conditioned by the agreement of the trade unions. In other words, they once and for all need the approval of the trade unions, why?

At Steilas, it is clear that the Department of Education is responsible for the provision of resources and for the survival of public centres and workers who are directly responsible for them. At the same time, though we make a critical reading of the Department ' s performance, it is clear to us that we have a responsibility towards the workers and the centres. That is why, although on this occasion we have given our consent, no one understands that we give a blank cheque to the Department. But it is a decision that we take responsibly. Unfortunately, the responsibility that the Department of Education lacks today in relation to public education. And even if we sign, we will continue to mobilize in favor of public education and the working conditions of workers, on the street and at the tables that affect public education, as in the monitoring tables of the endowments of the centers, keeping our demands firmly, making the necessary contributions, allegations and complaints.