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

Bill to repeal most of the law that cut town councils' powers

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 4 October 2016. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Confederal de Unidos Podemos-En Comú Podem-En Marea.

Official title: Private member's bill for the application of urgent measures in local government matters.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000038· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would repeal almost all of Law 27/2013 on the rationalization and sustainability of local government, keeping only a few specific sections from repeal.
  2. It would restore a broad list of municipal powers, such as urban planning, water, social services, local police, urban transport, culture, sports and job promotion, and would regulate how the State and the regions can delegate more duties to municipalities, always with enough funding.
  3. For staffing cost rules, essential services would include those listed in Article 25 of the Local Government Bases Law and any service declared essential by each council's local government board.
  4. Municipalities that have been merged would get favorable financial conditions for ten years: a better funding coefficient, keeping their previous fiscal effort and priority in cooperation plans and grants, among others.
  5. Provincial councils could keep supporting municipalities under 20,000 residents with tax collection, electronic administration and cost monitoring until a new state rule is passed.
  6. The Government would have nine months to reorganize local powers and funding, with input from councils, experts and citizens, and to repeal the current spending rule.

Who it affects

  • Municipalities and other local entities: They would regain powers and flexibility cut by Law 27/2013.
  • Provincial councils (diputaciones): They would coordinate services of merged municipalities and could keep supporting small ones.
  • Merged municipalities: They would get favorable financial and minimum funding conditions for ten years.
  • Citizens: Local public services would be delivered closer to home with more participation.
  • The Spanish Government: It would have nine months to reform local government and its funding.

Words worth knowing

Ley 27/2013 (LRSAL)
A 2013 law that reduced the powers and resources of Spanish town councils; this bill would repeal almost all of it.
Regla de gasto (spending rule)
A legal limit on how much public spending can grow each year, set by the State.
Junta de Gobierno Local
The governing body of a town council, made up of the mayor and the council members he or she appoints.
Entidad local menor
A local entity smaller than a municipality, such as a village council, that manages local interests of a smaller population.

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. Introduced4 October 2016Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted18 October 2016The 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
Oct 2016Nov 2016Dec 2016Jan 201711. 4 October 2016: Presentación22. 18 October 2016: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 18/10/2016 hasta 21/10/201633. 18 October 2016: Calificación44. 21 October 2016: Gobierno Contestación desde 21/10/2016 hasta 29/11/201655. 29 November 2016: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 29/11/2016 hasta 14/02/201766. 14 February 2017: Concluido - (Rechazado) desde 14/02/2017 hasta 20/02/2017

14 February 2017

How did the plenary vote?

More votes against 86 yes · 172 no · 86 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill by the Confederal Parliamentary Group of Unidos Podemos-En Comú Podem-En Marea, for the application of urgent measures in local government matters.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 2 of sitting 27· 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 Mixto, Gcup-ec-em and GER. Against, most of Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Ciudadanos and Popular en el Congreso. 5 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 5 most voted in favour; in 40, against.

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

  • In favour: 5
  • Against: 40
  • Tie: 7
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Socialista84
84 abst.
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)5
5 against
Mixto19
12 in favour · 3 against · 2 abst. · 2 did not vote
Ciudadanos32
32 against
Gcup-ec-em67
67 in favour
GER9
7 in favour · 2 did not vote
Popular en el Congreso134
132 against · 2 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.