Congress debated an illegal proposal this Tuesday, examining the possibility of a wage-raising standard in the midst of high inflation. Inflation has persisted, with prices rising well over 10 percent for months, making policy choices feel urgent to many voters.
Before proceeding, a note: a congressional vote on an illegal proposal would not be legally binding. These efforts are political initiatives, not government policy. Red criticized the proposal as hollow and irrelevant. Earlier in April, the plenary of the Chamber endorsed an illegal proposal opposing a shift in Western Sahara policy; the next day, a Spanish leader visited Rabat to celebrate a change of position, highlighting the tension between rhetoric and reality in foreign policy matters.
Yet discussions of extralegal propositions carry weight. They reveal underlying contrasts and provide material for future debate. When ERC filed a draft bill proposing a wage increase by law to shield workers from the inflation surge, success appeared distant. The plenary did not expect approval. The dynamics between United We Can and PSOE remained central, with the usual parliamentary backers, yet the ideological battle among the three party groups persisted.
The debate unfolded in a semi-full chamber this Tuesday, with the room’s energy not matching its usual crowd, yet the contest remained heated in its own way.
Contents
Deputy Joan Baldoví knows how to bring parliamentary debates closer to street life. On Tuesday, he launched a one-and-a-half-minute address from the chamber platform: “We talk about inflation and wages consumed by inflation, so I begin by acknowledging a local shop. In Benimaclet, a district of Valencia, a store called Ultramarinos Javi, run by Maite and Javi, sells a basket of 28 items. Acts of solidarity like this remind me of our common humanity and make me proud as a citizen.”
For days, lawmakers wrestled with rising prices and the way inflation bites into households. They looked at the food basket approach with price controls, a concept Yolanda Díaz had introduced a week earlier, while its tone and emphasis have shifted since. Naturally, discussions included possible remedies too.
Beyond the tax-cut plan advanced by PSOE and PP and the government and autonomous communities, the Tuesday talks focused on a provocative idea: a law that compels wage increases to preserve purchasing power. If income falls, consumption drops and business health suffers, so proponents argued for direct action through law. The ERC offered an illegal proposal that asked the government to take three steps: first, re-evaluate salaries from January 1, 2023, so those earning below the SMI (€1,000) would see a change tied to the regional CPI; second, include a new budget provision to cover the salary increases for public employees according to the regional CPI; and third, raise the IPREM to protect the most vulnerable social groups.
When the proposal was announced, ERC stated its aim to increase salaries for all workers, both public and private, by law, signaling broad ambition beyond a narrow sector.
Forms
Jordi Salvador, the same MP who tempered Yolanda Díaz’s optimism about flexible contracts, defended the initiative as it expanded into part-time and intermittent roles. He was not restrained by force or fear; debate was fierce. He framed the proposal as a warning call to the political class to address poverty and highlighted that basic supermarket prices had surged to their highest levels in decades.
As he put it, when wages don’t rise while costs climb, real purchasing power erodes. Swift action becomes essential. A wage increase by law could be a viable way to avoid waiting for permission through social dialogue, he suggested, advocating less talk and more action.
Esquerra was not alone. EH Bildu backed the proposal, with their ally pushing the government not to retreat in seeking measures for workers. The shadow of regional elections in Europe flavored the debate. The party argued state intervention in wages should extend to energy and financial markets as well.
BNG also supported the illegal proposition. Their representative argued that a wage increase by law is preferable to relying on revenue deals. Compromís, Baldoví’s party, planned to join the support on Thursday when voting would occur. While the proposal itself might have limited immediate effect, the Valencia representative underscored that raising wages is the most direct form of assistance.
Differences
The parliamentary majority leaned left, united by ideological affinity, with Pedro Sánchez serving as Head of Government. Still, there are recurring splits in the House. United We Can often faces friction when ERC and EH Bildu align, especially on wage and social policy issues. Some representatives emphasized that social dialogue should not block meaningful action. One deputy argued the government should set price and wage targets rather than wait for negotiations alone.
PSOE also found itself balancing between ideology and pragmatism, sometimes described as a two-front approach. A prominent deputy from Granada criticized ERC’s push for stronger social dialogue and argued for reaffirming commitments to social programs and bargaining frameworks while remaining mindful of the broader economic context.
TRUE
Ultimately, PSOE and United We Can proposed several amendments to ERC’s plan, but ERC rejected them. The result was a split vote that left the left-leaning coalition leaning toward the left bloc, though not all partners would be bound by a single stance. The larger centrist and right-leaning parties, including PP, Vox, Cs, PDeCAT, and PNV, chose not to join the movement to advance a law boosting wages. The room felt hopeful about a broader discussion, even if formal approval seemed unlikely in the near term. The scene closed with a sense that Parliament had at least sparked a conversation about real-world effects—prices, living costs, and the daily reality for households. Baldoví, known for his practical approach, remained a focal point of the exchange.