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.

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

What it is

Proposal to protect homes in Galicia's traditional coastal settlements

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 13 December 2011. Introduced by: Comunidad Autónoma de Galicia - Parlamento.

Official title: Private member's bill amending Law 22/1988, of July 28, on the Coast (corresponding to file number 125/000026/0000 of the IX Legislature).

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 125/000005· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would amend the 1988 Coastal Law so that people who own land or buildings in the maritime-terrestrial zone, previously declared private property by a final court ruling, registered as such, or backed by public administrative acts, could request a 30-year concession, renewable for another 30 years, with no fee. If the State takes back those assets, it would have to take on existing mortgages and charges, or hand over a similar asset in the same municipality or pay compensation at market price within a two-kilometer radius.
  2. In Galicia, on land that was urban when the Coastal Law came into force, new uses and buildings could be authorized under current planning rules, under conditions. Land would count as urban if it was classified as such, if it met all the requirements to be classified (road access, water supply, drainage, electricity, and buildings covering two thirds of its area), and traditional rural settlements, whether formally declared or not.
  3. The bill would expand which works count as repair and improvement for buildings in the protection easement zone: conservation, consolidation, restoration, interior remodeling and recovery, without changing the building's volume or original configuration. Works to restore buildings destroyed by natural disasters or proven force majeure would also be included.
  4. Urban settlements consolidated before the law came into force and created under public administrative acts could be excluded from the maritime-terrestrial public domain by administrative decision, with a prior report from the affected city council or regional government, without the declassification process in Articles 17, 18 and 19 of the Law.

Who it affects

  • Owners of homes and land on the Galician coast affected by Coastal Law boundary determinations.: They could request an occupation concession with no fee and, if the State takes back the asset, require it to assume mortgages or give them another asset or compensation.
  • Residents of traditional rural settlements on the Galician coast.: Their settlements could be treated as urban land, allowing new uses and buildings.
  • Owners of legal buildings within the protection easement zone.: They could carry out more types of repair and improvement works, and rebuild after disasters.
  • City councils and the Xunta de Galicia (Galicia's regional government).: They would issue a prior report to exclude consolidated urban settlements from the public domain.

Words worth knowing

Dominio público marítimo-terrestre
The maritime-terrestrial public domain: the coastal zone (beaches, shores and sea) that is for public use and belongs to the State.
Deslinde
Boundary determination: the process by which the Administration marks the exact limits of the public coastal zone.
Servidumbre de protección
Protection easement: a strip of land next to the public coastal zone where only certain limited works and uses are allowed.
Concesión
Concession: authorization to use a public asset for a set period of time, without owning it.
Canon
Fee: a periodic payment made for using a public asset.

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. Introduced13 December 2011Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted21 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 2012Sept 2012Dec 2012Mar 201311. 13 December 2011: Presentación22. 21 December 2011: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 21/12/2011 hasta 28/12/201133. 21 December 2011: Calificación44. 28 December 2011: Gobierno Contestación desde 28/12/2011 hasta 05/03/201255. 5 March 2012: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 05/03/2012 hasta 07/05/201366. 7 May 2013: Concluido - (Rechazado) desde 07/05/2013 hasta 10/05/2013

7 May 2013

How did the plenary vote?

More votes against 3 yes · 304 no · 19 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill amending Law 22/1988, of July 28, on the Coast (corresponding to file number 125/000026/0000 of the IX Legislature).

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 1 of sitting 103· 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?

Against, most of Socialista, Mixto, GIP, GUPyD and Popular en el Congreso. 5 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 0 most voted in favour; in 49, against.

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

  • In favour: 0
  • Against: 49
  • Abstained: 1
  • Tie: 1
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Socialista110
106 against · 4 did not vote
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)5
4 abst. · 1 did not vote
Mixto18
3 in favour · 10 against · 1 abst. · 4 did not vote
GC-CiU16
13 abst. · 3 did not vote
GIP11
10 against · 1 did not vote
GUPyD5
5 against
Popular en el Congreso185
173 against · 1 abst. · 11 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.