Without environments, I'm going to get into the whole thing: public school supporters are being very nice to discuss a few things. Seriously, what is happening with the concerted centres is unacceptable. We are trying to argue with rigour and honesty, as if we were in a debate of different and legitimate views. But in Zeus, we are not! Formally yes, you know, everyone can think whatever they want, including the earth is flat. The view that all opinions are respectable is widespread, but that an opinion is widespread does not make it real.

Faced with arguments, descriptions of facts and data favorable to the public school, some complain: "You are against us." Not especially pigs, from the Christian School, who are quite quiet, passing their fingers intertwined at the tips of their feet, to see if their fists are not exposed, waiting for the storm to pass, to see if the law is applied at once and take as much as possible. Others wear latex gloves up to the elbows and go into digging skis that don't go anywhere. But they don't respond to the data on the table.

Can we really say that this is a debate? Instead of discussing, some are pretending. They have in their favour something far more effective than the arguments: power, authority, parliamentary majority. And they're conscious. They keep their appearance so that neighborhood shame is not stratospheric. There are those who are outraged saying how it is possible that they will beat us against our school. No matter how we show that we are not against any school, that the problem is how we spend public money, and what wonder everyone has to pay, whether it be an Olympic pool or an education in Catholic values. Public resources must be distributed according to criteria of justice and equity, respecting the principle of equality, and precisely to guarantee it, giving more to those who need it most. You cannot turn everything into pure rhetoric, a sign of forgiveness.

Electoral campaigns, increasingly supported by advertising techniques, are based on arguments that repeat slogans, regardless of what the opposite says. That has done a great deal of damage to us, because a sympathetic debate does not have to take the floor in turn, for you to say yours and I do mine, you care a little bit about what I said and I do the same.

They will tell me that I cannot undermine the views of my opponents because in return I only offer mine. If belief is true, it must apply to everyone. I accept that. That is why I ask you, not me, but you do respond to what the Harro Platform of the Public School of Urola Kosta said at its parliamentary hearing in June. Or the Community of the Basque Public School of Ordizia. Or the ILP representative. Or the Aiaraldea Public Education Platform Bizirik. Or the Federation of Parents' Associations, or Lay Education. Or -- don't all fit me! We are proud of public school, yes, but I am especially proud to be with those bits of women and men who put work, time, effort, relief, patience, thought, heart, soul and joy for the well-being of all. No rhetorical tricks or marketing techniques, against the current, far from compulsive individualism that drowns us. That is auzolan! It is a great pity that winning the debate does not affect public policies. But that's not in our hands right now.