The first vice-president and deputy for Water Cycle, Ana Serna, lamented that the judgment represents “a new blow to the economic, social, and environmental interests of the province of Alicante and the entire Spanish southeast”. Serna criticized that the resolution “ratifies the water policy of the Government of Spain which is disastrous for our territory” and maintained that it leaves the Tajo-Segura transfer “on the verge of disappearance”, warning of a possible 50% cut.
The provincial official called on the central Government for “broad vision” and asked it to opt for “dialogue and consensus” before adopting decisions that, as she pointed out, condemn a large part of the Spanish territory. The Council maintains its support for the irrigators.
The vice-president highlighted the work of the Central Union of Irrigators of the Tajo-Segura Aqueduct (SCRATS) “to try to stop the outrage that reducing the transfer represents for this province”. In this regard, she assured that the Provincial Council of Alicante, now also aligned with the Generalitat Valenciana, will continue alongside the irrigators to defend their interests. Although Serna admitted that from a legal standpoint “practically all doors have been closed to us”, she insisted that the provincial institution will continue defending the transfer “in all possible arenas”.
“This province will not yield an inch in the defense of the water we deserve”, she affirmed.
The deputy for Water Cycle recalled that irrigators have been warning for years about the consequences of the progressive reduction of transferred flows. As she denounced, the Government of Spain “continues to advance on a roadmap that will only bring desert and poverty to the Spanish Levant”. Serna warned that, if the reduction of the transfer is consummated, the province would face the destruction of thousands of hectares of irrigated land, the loss of millions of trees, and an impact on more than 100,000 direct and indirect jobs linked to the sector.
Therefore, she demanded that the central Government abandon “any ideological approach to water matters” and adopt decisions based on “technical, scientific, and territorial solidarity” criteria, arguing that “water cannot become a tool for political confrontation”.




