The scenario left by the vote on September 26 is clear: the Sustainable Mobility Law continues its course.
The rejection of the amendment presented by the Popular Party (PP), with 176 votes against and 168 in favour, has been the first barrier overcome in the long road that the project must go through.
Although it has managed to advance in the Congress of Deputies, the content of the law continues to be the subject of debate, especially considering that it is the same text that was presented in the previous legislature and that could not be processed due to the early elections.
Carlos Bravo, environmental consultant, sums up the situation in conversation with Mobility Portal España:
“There was no alternative text to debate: the parties had to decide whether to accept returning the project to the Government and, in the end, the decision was negative by an absolute majority.”
According to the expert, the amendment to the whole presented by the PP did not make much sense in the terms in which it was presented.
“Had an alternative bill been presented, the situation could have been different, but since it was a purely devolution amendment, based on the rejection of the law, the strategy was somewhat weak,” he says.
It was therefore predictable that most groups would not support such a review.
“The defects mentioned in the text highlight problems with the law that can be corrected and addressed through partial revisions,” he adds.
Esquerra Republicana, Sumar and Bildu have made it clear that the proposal needs improvements, since the text lacks clear objectives, both in terms of decarbonisation and the promotion of electromobility.
“It does not propose any specific goals nor does it mention those of the National Energy and Climate Plan (PNIEC), something that is essential if we are looking for real progress in the sustainability of transport,” Bravo emphasizes.
It is this lack of ambition in CO2 reduction targets that has prompted some of the criticism.
And not only that.
The expert points out that the law includes references to the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) for maritime transport, which environmental sectors and parties such as Sumar consider contradictory.
“If we want to decarbonise mobility, it makes no sense to rely on fossil fuels,” he says.
What are the next steps for the law?
With the rejection of the amendment in its entirety, the Government now has an opportunity to open up to negotiation and improve the project, something that progressive parties hope to see.
The next step in the legislative process is the period for submitting partial revisions, which is currently open until October 2, although “it is possible that it may be extended.”
In this regard, Bravo believes: “The Government will have to accept a large number of amendments if it really wants to improve the law from an environmental and climate perspective.”
The real challenge, he warns, will be in the Senate, where the Popular Party has a majority.
“There they could try to delay approval for up to two months, as they already did with the Amnesty Law,” he said.
So when will the directive be released?
The expert estimates that, although it is not impossible for it to be approved by the end of this year, “it is more likely that it will be ready in the first quarter of 2025.“
What is happening with European funds?
One of the issues in this process is the possibility of compromising a significant part of the European funds intended for sustainable mobility if the law is not approved in time.
Transport Minister Óscar Puente himself warned during the debate that Spain could lose 10 billion euros if the project is not successful.
In this context, Carlos Bravo is optimistic: “A three-month delay will not affect the reception of the shipment, since the processing is well advanced.”
