Since the BOE published the dissolution of the Cortes, in many steering committees the same phrase is repeated: “we will take it up again after the 29N.” It is understandable. The noise invites thinking that public policies and regulation give way for a few weeks to pure electoral confrontation.
It is, however, a very simplistic view of the political and regulatory ecosystem. The dissolution paralyzes a large part of parliamentary activity, but not the functioning of the State. Many centers of normative power, the majority in fact, continue to function.
The dissolution paralyzes a large part of parliamentary activity, but not the functioning of the State
The machinery of the State and the European Union does not shut down
It is advisable to start with the basics. Until November 29, the Government is not in a caretaker role: it retains the fullness of its powers. It can approve royal decrees, ministerial orders, and, if it considers it urgent, royal decree-laws. The ministries continue processing regulations, opening public consultations, and resolving files that directly impact economic and social life.
The Parliament does not disappear completely either. The Permanent Deputation, that great protagonist these days, assumes the functions of the Chambers and is the one who must validate, or not, the royal decree-laws that may be approved. With those on housing still fresh, no one should rule out that the Government legislates again through that route.
The autonomous communities continue to operate at full capacity, both in their governments and in their legislative assemblies, and in that area regulations continue to be approved that affect the business fabric. And this is joined by the municipalities and other bodies, which make decisions that impact the companies' bottom line.
Finally, but perhaps most importantly, there is Brussels, which does not vote on the 29N. Spanish ministers continue to sit on councils, trilogues advance, Parliament continues legislating, and the Commission prepares its agenda for 2027. None of this stops due to the electoral calendar of a member State.
A good part of the regulation that will affect energy, industry, the agri-food sector, health, trade relations with third States, or technology in the coming years is still being written there.
The public policies that are to come
But the most powerful argument is not what continues to function, but what begins to take shape. The parties are now finalizing their programs and in a few weeks they will have to translate slogans into concrete proposals on housing, taxation, energy, healthcare, circular economy, or industry. These proposals do not arise solely from the party apparatuses: they are fed by data, diagnoses, and ideas that, beyond the internal ones, someone brings to them. And to bring it with the utmost rigor. I will not tire of saying it: there is no greater technical legitimacy than that of those who dedicate their day-to-day to prospering their business responsibly; nor greater social legitimacy than that of those who maintain an active dialogue and a capacity for understanding, not of necessary acquiescence, with civil society. It is the responsibility of organizations to seek spaces for that dialogue to exist; also now.
The parties are now finalizing their programs and in a few weeks they will have to translate slogans into concrete proposals
An electoral program is much more than a campaign document. It is the first draft of the public policies that a future government will want to put on the table in its first hundred days. That is why, those who renounce to participate in this debate allow others to define the framework in which they will later have to move.
There is another element that is often overlooked: in a parliamentary system marked years ago by the absence of absolute majorities, no program is applied as is. What ends up in the BOE is conditioned by the capacity for negotiation with potential partners. And it is here where an intelligent reading must be made, transcending therefore the pure slogan, of the red lines that they are precisely sliding during this period in which we find ourselves immersed.
The debate and intelligence, also on social networks.
To confine the work of intelligence to the reading of electoral programs or to the monitoring of electoral rallies is too simplistic. The debate on public policies, which is not the same as the political debate, transcends the dynamics of the current affairs of political parties during the electoral period.
And here social media, beyond the relationship that each one has with it, has long been demonstrated as an absolutely necessary focal point. And yes, one must eliminate the noise, know how to read them, transcend the ephemeral comment, flee from immediacy. This is done with professionalism, being aware of the true digital power, of the capacity for influence, which goes far beyond the number of followers, or the interaction that someone may have. It is much more complex and it would be irresponsible not to dedicate efforts to know how to read it and, even, to participate actively in it.
To confine the intelligence work to the reading of some electoral programs or to the monitoring of electoral rallies is too simplistic
Moment also to claim the professionalism of influence
I must not miss the opportunity to claim institutional or public affairs activity as a strategic activity. I know that the qualifier is too empty of content on many occasions. Let’s give it content: nowadays it is inconceivable and irresponsible that the management of a business is carried out without dedicating efforts to structure this activity internally, provide it with stability, exercise it professionally, and be accountable for it.
And this is also done now, because as we have reflected, the machinery does not stop and on the national level, on November 29, it will be voted who will make up the Chambers, but a good part of what that future Government will do is already being decided. Companies that understand the electoral period as a pause will discover in January that public policies and the regulatory agenda were written without them.