Varias personas residentes vacacionales en Plentzia mostraron al Ararteko su disconformidad con algunos aspectos del sistema de estacionamiento regulado.

Consideran que la normativa introduce una desigualdad de trato entre los residentes empadronados que tienen el vehículo registrado en el municipio de Plentzia y las personas que tienen una segunda vivienda en propiedad en el municipio, pero que no están empadronadas ni tienen censado el vehículo en ese municipio.

Los reclamantes creen que el Ayuntamiento otorga un trato diferente al residente empadronado y al no empadronado que pasa meses en el municipio coincidiendo con el periodo de implantación de la normativa en cuestión (del 1 de julio al 8 de septiembre). Asimismo, señalan que el consistorio ha dejado a este colectivo sin prácticamente posibilidad de aparcamiento en el centro del municipio, ya que las áreas de estacionamiento se reservan exclusivamente para las personas residentes.

Por otra parte, aseguran que el aparcamiento situado en el Metro es exclusivo de residentes impidiendo a los vecinos de Gorliz, Barrika y Lemoiz su uso, cuando el servicio de autobuses es escaso y finaliza a las 10 de la noche. Respecto al puerto, manifiestan que han creado cuatro plazas de aparcamiento limitado a dos horas (zona azul), pero consideran que es tiempo insuficiente para aparcar, descargar y salir a la mar.

Finalmente, también se refieren a una parcela situada en la trasera del Ayuntamiento que, según indican, es propiedad de la Diputación Foral y se ha calificado como exclusiva para residentes.

Tras solicitar información al Ayuntamiento, éste remitió al Ararteko un informe señalando que no es cierto que las personas visitantes no cuentan con posibilidades de aparcamiento, reiterando que en los meses de época estival se generaban problemas a las personas que residen durante 12 meses en el municipio, a las personas que trabajan en el mismo o aquellas que cuentan con tarjeta de movilidad reducida, e insistiendo en que el principio de igualdad no es aplicable sin tener en cuenta el principio de equidad.

El Ararteko considera que la finalidad de los regímenes de residentes que se establecen en las regulaciones de los sistemas de estacionamiento limitado es posibilitar que las personas residentes puedan estacionar cerca de su domicilio sin las trabas que imponen dichos sistemas. A pesar de haber trasladado esta consideración en la petición de información, el Ayuntamiento no se ha pronunciado sobre ella. 

A juicio de esta institución las explicaciones que ha ofrecido el consistorio no justifican la diferencia de trato que se otorga a uno y otro grupo de residentes en función de la finalidad de la medida.

Por ello, recomienda al Ayuntamiento de Plentzia que revise dicho servicio en lo relativo al diferente tratamiento que otorga a las personas residentes empadronadas y a las vacacionales.

RESOLUCIÓN

• La Diputada del Común se mostró muy preocupada por la tasa de abandono escolar y el no alcanzar el 5% del PIB
• Los representantes sindicales dieron a conocer los principales problemas que sigue afrontando el profesorado en el Archipiélago

La Diputada del Común, Lola Padrón, se reunió este martes 12 de noviembre, con los máximos representantes del sindicato mayoritario de la enseñanza pública de las islas: el presidente de ANPE Canarias, Pedro Crespo; el presidente de ANPE Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Víctor González, y la presidenta de ANPE Las Palmas, María Perera. Los representantes sindicales dieron a conocer los principales problemas que sigue afrontando el profesorado en el Archipiélago, entre ellos, la falta de inversión, el exceso de burocracia, las altas ratios, el mal estado de las infraestructuras educativas o el estado de la salud mental del profesorado y del alumnado. Desde ANPE consideran que los pasos que se han dado hasta ahora para intentar paliar dichos problemas «son insuficientes y, por tanto, es necesario mantener abiertas continuas negociaciones para establecer una mejora en el Pacto por la Educación».

La Diputada del Común resaltó de este encuentro que “recibimos una queja más de colectivos que representan tanto al profesorado como otros, preocupados por la Educación en Canarias porque el presupuesto no refleja lo que la Ley de Educación Canaria plantea que es llegar al 5% del PIB, y es como el horizonte que nunca se consigue y va a dejar muchos talentos por el camino, porque el no poder bajar el número de niños y niñas por aula, teniendo profesorado para reforzar la labor tan importante en todos los sentidos, no es posible si el presupuesto no refleja la realidad de la educación pública canaria”. Desde el sindicato existe una gran preocupación precisamente por esta falta de atención personalizada y por ese objetivo presupuestario no alcanzado. Indicaron que hay que adaptar la realidad de niños y niñas y su diversidad dentro de las aulas, “para poder dar un modelo educativo que no solo se base en contenidos sino en competencias”. Aseguran que “es prioritario y preciso un plan plurianual de revisión de ratios realista, un plan concreto, algo que hemos planteado a todos los partidos políticos”. Se habló del alumnado migrante, de la lengua y de la necesidad de ofrecerles unas herramientas que les de una oportunidad de vida, un tratamiento que reconocen “no se les está ofreciendo”. Otras de las cosas que han planteado a la Diputación del Común es la preocupación por el profesorado de religión y los convenios, porque desde el sindicato se busca mejorar sus condiciones sociolaborales.

Lola Padrón, mostró además su preocupación por la tasa de abandono escolar en Canarias, dado que es una de las más altas de España, con un 17% frente al 13% nacional, “lo cual limita el acceso a oportunidades laborales de calidad”, señaló. La falta de recursos en educación y la desigualdad en el acceso a actividades extracurriculares refuerzan las barreras para los niños y jóvenes de entornos vulnerables. La Diputada del Común además señaló que Canarias tiene un índice de pobreza infantil elevado, debido en parte a la falta de infraestructuras adecuadas y a un sistema de apoyo familiar menos desarrollado. “La pobreza en Canarias es una problemática profunda y compleja, que va más allá de la falta de ingresos. Se caracteriza por una pobreza invisible que limita el acceso de muchos ciudadanos a derechos básicos como la educación, la sanidad y la vivienda”, indicó.

On 11/11/2024, at a consultation in the National Council entitled Deficiencies in the System of Assistance to Children and Young People in Need – A call for action by professional centres, the Human Rights Ombudsman Peter Svetina pointed out some shortcomings that the institution of the Ombudsman perceives during visits to expert centres in the role of National Preventive Mechanism and when considering complaints. The purpose of the consultation was to shed light on the problems in this area and to formulate ideas and proposals that will be addressed to decision-makers with the hope of immediate implementation.

Ombudsman Svetina said that the NPM, which regularly monitors the situation in institutions such as expert centres, training institutes, crisis centres, the department of the University Psychiatric Clinic for Children and Adolescents, and the Radeče Juvenile Correctional Facility, has in recent years noticed an increase in the number of children and adolescents who have the most severe emotional and behavioural problems. Their hardships result in crisis situations, such as peer violence and violence by children and adolescents towards employees, self-harming behaviour, escapes from expert centres, consumption of prohibited substances, and the commission of various misdemeanours and crimes. "These are serious challenges that require a comprehensive approach and coordinated co-operation between all stakeholders. The NPM has warned the expert centres and the Ministry of Education (even under its previous name) of systemic problems and made recommendations several times," said Ombudsman Svetina at the consultation and listed some of the challenges with which expert centres meet and are perceived as pressing by the Ombudsman or the NPM.

"We often find that placing children according to their place of residence, as stipulated by the Act on the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Emotional and Behavioural Problems and Disorders (ZOOMTVI), is not always in their best interest. Therefore, we recommended that the Ministry study the possible shortcomings of such a system and take measures that will ensure optimal treatment for every child," he said. The NPM also recommended that the Ministry ensure the acquisition of additional knowledge and experience for expert workers in the new intensive groups, so that they will be able to solve crisis events effectively. It should ensure that there are sufficient medical staff and should examine legal and systemic options for more effective enforcement of placement decisions. The NPM also recommended that the Ministry help expert centres in providing adequate accommodation for children and adolescents with emotional and behavioural problems and ensure standards for their equipment and operation.

The Ombudsman is convinced that it is only in co-operation between various stakeholders, including the health, educational, and judicial systems, that it is possible to provide adequate support to these children and adolescents. He concluded that the goal of the consultation is not only to improve conditions in expert center, but also to establish mechanisms of assistance, including to families, so that children and adolescents do not end up in such institutions. "We need effective early treatment programmes that will prevent the development of more severe forms of disorders and enable young people to develop in a safe and stimulating environment," said Ombudsman Peter Svetina and appealed to the public to react when they sense distress. Although we are more and more burdened by our ailments and feel that we must leave our fellow man alone, not intrude into his privacy, "a discreet watchful eye and an appropriate reaction can be just as effective in such cases as resuscitation of people after a stroke: they help in time and thus prevent more severe consequences. My appeal goes beyond the space of this hall: let's be human to our fellow man and ask them if everything is all right with them. We offer help or just a shoulder to lean on. In this way, we can prevent or mitigate many sad stories with serious consequences," said Ombudsman Peter Svetina.

Leicester City Council has refused part of the Ombudsman’s recommendation to pay a homeless woman for not giving her the right support when she asked it for help.

The Local Government and Social Care stepped in to investigate after the mother and her children were forced to flee their home to escape domestic abuse.

The council first placed the family in interim bed and breakfast accommodation before referring them to a refuge which provided self-contained accommodation.

The mother contacted the council repeatedly as she thought the refuge was negatively affecting her children’s health conditions and was too far away from her support network. The council failed to respond.

When the council did finally get in touch following her complaint, it told the mother to go back to the refuge for support.

The council finally accepted it had a duty to house the family some four months after it should have done so, and it offered the family bed and breakfast accommodation as temporary accommodation, which they moved into after the refuge. However, it failed to tell her that it had accepted the main housing duty towards her family, and of her right to appeal the suitability of the accommodation offered through the courts. The family remained in the bed and breakfast for 19 weeks.

The council eventually offered the family a one-bedroomed property, and while the council acknowledged that it was not suitable for the family, it again failed to tell the mother she could appeal.

Ms Amerdeep Somal, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

“While I acknowledge the work Leicester City Council has already done to improve its support for homeless people in the city, and its acceptance of the service improvements I have recommended, I am disappointed with its reluctance to fully acknowledge what has gone wrong in this case. It is not accepting the gravity of the injustice to this family by not agreeing the pay the financial remedy I have recommended.

“The law states that families should only be put in bed and breakfast accommodation as a last resort, and this should be for no longer than six weeks. This family was in bed and breakfast accommodation for 19 weeks. The family was split over two rooms, and had no access to cooking facilities which no doubt had a significant impact on their mental health.

“The council has told me it has 170 other families who have been in this sort of accommodation for longer than six weeks. I hope the changes it is making will ensure that other families in Leicester are considered appropriately, and informed of their appeal rights in future.”

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman remedies injustice and shares learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In this case the council should apologise to the mother and pay her £500 for the distress caused by not responding to her concerns about the suitability of the refuge accommodation. It has agreed to pay this amount.

It should also pay the family £1,300 for the distress caused by living in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation for longer than they should have done and a further £150 per month for every month she remains in unsuitable temporary accommodation.

The council has not agreed to these recommendations.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve processes for the wider public. In this case the council has agreed to draw up an action plan for reducing the number of families it has in bed and breakfast accommodation. It will also train or remind officers about their duties towards homeless families and improve its template letters to ensure they reflect people’s rights are highlighted.