There is a common belief that fish have only a short memory, a notion that feeds the old saying about a fishy memory. This stereotype is sometimes used by politicians and their teams to sway voters, a tactic that paints memory as a flaw to be exploited while criticizing opponents. The image of a bird used to distract attention from what matters is a familiar metaphor in politics and media alike.
Recent discussions about the state of the nation have become a yearly ritual, a tradition that continues even through election years. The government team, as its name implies, subjects itself to public parliamentary scrutiny: examining the state of the nation, its responsibilities, and the proposals it offers for improvement.
Times of extraordinary strain have made memory exercises feel longer. It has been seven years since the last televised debate by President Mariano Rajoy in February 2015, a moment that followed a period of austerity and cuts. The inflation gap against the eurozone then can be seen as 11 points different, a reminder that the economy shifts over time. The eurozone average, which was modest at that moment, has since changed markedly, rising to higher levels in the present period.
The leader who presided over the first coalition government, Pedro Sánchez, has moved from being in the opposition to steering the government. Critics from the previously ruling bloc have held him to account for inflation and for calls to raise the minimum wage, bolster unemployment protections, and reconsider labor reforms. In the data on unemployment there is a clear shift: the number of unemployed has fallen since 2015, while the size of the workforce and the share of the population supported by social programs have also evolved. The minimum wage rose to a higher level, reflecting policy choices that affect living standards.
The People’s Party, as the main opposition, argued against the left’s reform agenda, aiming to frame public discussion around corruption scandals and the parties involved. The period saw Rajoy facing questions when corruption cases became a focal point, and the party faced convictions that shaped public memory of political accountability. The narrative around these events highlighted tensions between governing parties and opposition voices, especially in relation to transparency and reform efforts.
During attempts to clarify the health of the banking sector, the opposition pressed for explanations about a potential bailout. The public response framed the situation as a loan to stabilize the banks rather than a blanket rescue, and the figures discussed underscored the limited returns on the financial package: a large injection with only a small portion recovered over time.
In the years that followed, a package of measures proposed by the government aimed at stabilizing the economy and addressing important sectors included provisional taxes and expectations of contributions from banks and energy companies. The opposition, meanwhile, kept its focus on governance and the state’s direction, recalling past security concerns and the long history of political violence associated with separatist groups. These debates also intersected with discussions about a new law on memory and historical reckoning, with various parties arguing about how best to balance state obligations with the rights and recognition owed to victims. The dialogue around the Historical Memory Act remained a touchstone for policymakers, educators, and citizens alike, reflecting broader questions about how history informs present justice and policy.
Memory policy invites scrutiny of how history is taught and remembered—whether the nation should continue to verify episodes from the 1936 coup, the dictatorship, and the transition, and how such memory should be presented in textbooks. The aim is to ensure that the state undertakes truth-telling, accountability, and, where possible, reconciliation. In public discourse, the goal is to build a coherent narrative that supports democratic resilience and provides fairness to those affected by past events while guiding current and future policy decisions.
Is the task complete? Not yet. The path toward justice, transparency, and reparation remains in progress, shaped by ongoing debates, new data, and the evolving political landscape that guides the nation forward.
There is a common link drawn between memory and survival. Studies show that memory helps avoid dangers, recognize recurring patterns, and respond to threats. Animals, including fish, rely on memory to navigate environments and avoid traps, just as humans use collective memory to learn from the past and make informed choices for the future.