It was quite a surprise to see Spain's new culture minister, Ernest Urtasun from Barcelona, applauding in Cádiz at the presentation of the Gold Medal of Fine Arts to Ganadería Miura, one of the best-known breeders of fighting bulls in Andalusia and Spain, with more than 175 years of history. Next to him, the monarchs Felipe VI and Letizia, neither of them particularly in love with bullfighting, in fact, just like the minister from Catalunya en Comú. Urtasun had always identified himself as anti-bullfighting, describing it as a "sadistic and despicable" activity and had signed manifestos against it. What then is such a politician doing at an event like this, we might ask. And the logical and easy answer would be that his position forced him to be there and that the decision to give the award was not his, since he inherited a choice made by his predecessor, another Catalan politician, Miquel Iceta. That's the spin I've heard most since the images went public and a kind of protective coating has been applied over the issue among his supporters.
But in politics, things are not that easy and nor do they have one single answer. In an issue like this, which affects widespread sensibilities in society, such as those who speak out against cruelty to animals, you need to try to go beyond a tweet that includes you in a new left which, when in opposition says one thing and when in government does the opposite. Mayor Ada Colau, from the same political space as Urtasun, left a series of examples in her years at the head of the Catalan capital, such as opposing the Constitutional Court sentence that annulled the Catalan law prohibiting bullfights.
There is a distinction between the representativeness and obligations of the position - that of the minister of culture - and Urtasun's behaviour: his unnecessary attitude of effusive support for the award winner. And Urtasun knows this very well because, among other reasons, he has, despite his youthful age of 42, sufficient educational background. In his CV, it appears that he passed the examinations and entered the diplomatic corps, where he took on different responsibilities at the Spanish foreign ministry, including the role of diplomatic advisor to the EU secretary general for the Mediterranean. Between 2014 and 2023 he was also an MEP.
Urtasun chose to join la fiesta - the celebration - with all his energy and, in practice, endorse the arguments which minister Iceta gave for awarding the Miura enterprise
The position of minister obliges you to go to the event, unless for one reason or another you turn it down, and, as the minister of turn, do not accompany the monarchs. I repeat, though, that for me the issue is how you act. That's what makes the difference. Nothing obliges you to applaud because that is a private, unofficial gesture. It is where you make a difference and express in public what your values are. No one would have been surprised if this had been Urtasun's attitude. Of course, another thing altogether is that those present would not have liked it, given an atmosphere very favourable to bullfighting and the defence of the bull tradition. If you disagree, if your principles are different, you are on the stage as an authority figure but you avoid applauding and joining in with something that you say is not in line with your values and on which you have established a certain doctrine. And probably, in addition, you have more credibility with those present if you end up doing it this way.
Urtasun chose to join la fiesta - the celebration - with all his energy and, in practice, endorse the arguments which minister Iceta gave for awarding the bullfighting enterprise and which read as follows: "The Miura breeding ranch is probably the most legendary in the history of bullfighting. The breed's fidelity to its origins is particularly noteworthy, since, throughout its almost two-hundred-year history, it has maintained a unique character, associated with values such as bravura, emotion and the beauty of the fighting bull". That's what Urtasun applauded and that is his error. Not the 'being there', but the 'knowing how to act' while there. There is a big difference between the first and the second. It is the difference between the position one holds and the principles one has or defends.