I am clear about the differences between the different ways of doing things between the territories, particularly in carrying out institutional decisions. It would be a matter of going too far, of deducing that they are either like that or otherwise. It bothers me to make these kinds of distinctions that are becoming more and more internalized.

Although some seem obvious, I find it difficult to enumerate the differences between the different forms of all territories. Even if there is one who systematizes all the differences that we have between us, it would be no more than a scapegoat that would lead us from chaos to nothing.

It's easier to start with a list of elements that we share and that equate us, long as short. That would be one of the elements that makes us citizens, that equality is what helps us to make the community a nation. There is the Basque country, a historical agglutinant of centuries and, in recent decades, in the times of the greatest political and administrative unity in our history, an essential engine and a soul indivisible so far.

The Basque Batua has recognized and granted us citizenship, without it would be ruined our habitats and dialects that have acquired an amazing prestige today. They would be nothing more than a concrete and unrecoverable historical memory, exposing a poor and deplorable testimony of inculture. That's why I'm nervous about trying to write dialects that have no feet, no head, no ruler. For a long time, invented in linguistics, I don't know if these are sessions that start from ignorance or that lead to ignorance.

It is a very worrying endeavour when it comes from institutions or public responsibilities, both political and in any other way, of people. I'm scared of that vast variety of language that wants to be Biscayan, because I don't know what devil comes beyond a false honesty. Why? By hidden rules, Biscayan political representatives, with the exception of the honourable actions of Mr Lehendakari and Mr Beumer. Erkoreka, we have to touch the Dabe, the Deutu or the Dinoe. Some even make a gesture of recovering a language that has never been theirs.

The counsellor has said that he has made available to a Biscayan the responsibility for a linguistic policy that has so far always been Gipuzkoan. I would accept you if the argument is that the name should be critical of that linguistic by-pass. Although in my time I had been reassured by the fear of destruction that could have been caused by the backs of the party authorities, we have not lost the intention to continue saying, eating or bringing home.