Our region completely rejects the TAV project or, as is currently known, the TAV High-Performance Train, and our platform wants to show that opposition. This project is nothing more than a waste of money. The money invested in construction cannot be depreciated and has no social return either. This type of service is used by people with great economic capacity to which we are subsidizing, cheaper tickets, channelling money into this type of infrastructure… However, the nearby railway service is becoming more expensive. And that's what most people use.

In addition, in our case, the TAV would divide the region into two. And not how a highway would separate it. The new railway would be a kind of physical curtain, a kind of insurmountable barrier. We would like to have the support of the institutions, but unfortunately the Government of Navarra wants to promote the TAV. However discreetly, Geroa Bai has done so since his arrival in the government. In Navarre no alternative has been evaluated. Nor has the Government taken the word of citizenship into account. First the project has been completed and the accounts have been closed, and then an explanation has been given to society.

For us, however, there are alternatives for the Navarre corridor. I am also part of Subai Erakuntza, where we have developed the TPS Public and Social Train project. It is based on the Rail Transport Plan of 1987. In this sense, the section between Castejón and Alsasua should be renewed and reinforced with the unfolding of the railway line. This plan has never been carried out, as it forgot the construction of the AVE Madrid-Sevilla. It is clear to us that the Navarre network is already obsolete. There is the possibility of doubling the route and, in our opinion, there is the solution. In addition, we propose the implementation of an Iberian and international width for each track.

TPS would make it possible to transport unlimited people and goods. The maximum speed for persons would be between 60 and 180 kilometres per hour and for goods of 90 kilometres per hour. To do so, we would use an infrastructure already built. In other words, billions of euros would be saved. The TPS would also take care of nearby transport. We want to recover several stations that have stopped working, driving rail transport and making real competition with the road.

From an environmental point of view too, our proposal is more appropriate. The TAV would supposedly save emissions and never match what was sent in its construction. On the contrary, our plan is much clearer. For the time being, welcome is being good. Many citizens needed an alternative. However, it will be difficult to bring the proposal of TPS to the places of power. Groups with a very concrete political vision and the construction lobbies are the drivers of the APR. And after all, they are in power. This project would not overcome any critical analysis. But TAV is a great way to pass public money into private hands at great speed.