Skip to content

Where are you from?

Choose your province and we will tell you how the deputies and senators you elected vote, one by one.

 

We remember it in this browser. If you create an account, we keep it there.
Sign in

Type a law, a topic, a person or a province.

What it is

Bill would require cost-benefit studies before infrastructure spending

Admitted step 2 of 7 · Rejected

It is a members’ bill. Introduced by parliamentary groups, the Senate, regional governments or citizens. It was introduced on 21 December 2011. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Catalán (Convergència i Unió).

Official title: Private member's bill amending Law 30/2007, of 30 October, on public sector contracts, to incorporate a prior cost-benefit study before the approval of investments intended to finance new infrastructure.

Follow this law

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000022· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would require a study comparing the cost of new infrastructure projects with their expected social and economic benefits before approving the investment. The goal is to prioritize the most useful projects and drop or delay those that bring less well-being.
  2. The bill would require a cost-benefit analysis for infrastructure projects with a budget over 12 million euros, and for those paid through financial leasing or lease-to-own arrangements lasting more than 4 years. The Council of Ministers would also need this report to authorize the related contracts.
  3. The annual State Budget bill would have to include a summary report of the cost-benefit analysis for each new infrastructure project over 12 million euros.
  4. If passed, the law would take effect the day after its publication in the Official State Gazette (Boletín Oficial del Estado).

Who it affects

  • The Government and the Council of Ministers, who would need the report to authorize these contracts.: New steps before approving large investments.
  • Public administrations contracting infrastructure works over 12 million euros.: They would have to prepare the cost-benefit analysis.
  • Parliament and the public, who would see a summary of these analyses in the Budget.: More information on how public money is spent.

Words worth knowing

Proposición de ley
A bill introduced by a parliamentary group; it is not yet an approved law.
Análisis coste-beneficio
Cost-benefit analysis: a study comparing what a project costs with the social and economic benefits it will bring.
Arrendamiento financiero
Financial leasing: a contract similar to renting with an option to buy, used to pay for goods or projects in installments.
Consejo de Ministros
Council of Ministers: the meeting of government ministers that makes major decisions.
Principio de subsidiariedad
Subsidiarity: the idea that each level of government should do only what is necessary, without taking over other levels' powers.

It summarizes the text as it was introduced. It is written by artificial intelligence and may contain mistakes: the official text is what counts. Read the official text · How we make summaries

Where it stands

How far did it get?

It took 2 of 7 steps. It reached Admitted, and today it is rejected.

  1. Introduced21 December 2011Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted28 December 2011The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
  3. Amendmentsnot reachedGroups propose changes.
  4. Committeenot reachedA committee goes through the text in detail.
  5. Plenarynot reachedAll 350 deputies vote.
  6. Senatenot reachedThe Senate can pass it, amend it or veto it.
  7. BOEnot reachedIt is published in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and comes into force.
See the 6 official steps on a timeline
Dec 2011Mar 2012Jun 201211. 21 December 2011: Presentación22. 28 December 2011: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 28/12/2011 hasta 05/01/201233. 28 December 2011: Calificación44. 5 January 2012: Gobierno Contestación desde 05/01/2012 hasta 07/03/201255. 7 March 2012: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 07/03/2012 hasta 18/09/201266. 18 September 2012: Concluido - (Rechazado) desde 18/09/2012 hasta 21/09/2012

18 September 2012

How did the plenary vote?

More votes against 147 yes · 176 no · 1 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill amending Law 30/2007, of 30 October, on public sector contracts, to incorporate a prior cost-benefit study before the approval of investments intended to finance new infrastructure.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 1 of sitting 54· updated 10 Nov

Each dot is a seat. Tap one, or use the arrow keys, to see who it is.

Your province

How did the deputies from your province vote?

And your senators: the Senate does not link its votes to this law in its open data, so we cannot put them side by side here.

Or see how most of each province voted
More details: how each group and each province voted

The groups

Who voted in favour and who against?

In favour, most of Socialista, Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Mixto, GC-CiU and GIP. Against, most of GUPyD and Popular en el Congreso. 5 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 8 most voted in favour; in 37, against.

Coloured by how most of each province’s deputies voted.

  • In favour: 8
  • Against: 37
  • Tie: 7
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Socialista110
106 in favour · 4 did not vote
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)5
5 in favour
Mixto18
11 in favour · 2 against · 1 abst. · 4 did not vote
GC-CiU16
14 in favour · 2 did not vote
GIP11
10 in favour · 1 against
GUPyD5
5 against
Popular en el Congreso185
1 in favour · 168 against · 16 did not vote

What happens next

What happens now?

It goes no further. A similar one could be introduced later.

Sources

Where does all this come from?

  • The data comes from the open files of the Congreso, the Senate and the BOE, unaltered.
  • Each deputy’s province is the one of their seat on the day of the vote.
  • We only say “passed” or “rejected” when the majority needed is certain; otherwise we say which side had more votes.

Read the full method · Report an error