A total of 182 parishes now want to separate, ending existing unions for ten years. This number corresponds to 20.5% of a universe of 884 parishes in the country and is the result of the so-called Relvas Law (named after the nickname of the then Deputy Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, Miguel Relvas), approved in 2013 , eliminating currently existing unions.
Previously, the national territory consisted of 4,259 parishes. After this reform, the number fell by 1,168 to 3,091 (2,882 of which were on the continent), and in the autonomous regions there were no trade unions. After the reorganization there were 884 aggregations. In most cases (666) pairs were formed, but there were also situations where the number of parishes grouped into one parishes was seven.
Today there are even twelve parishes in Lisbon. However, this union predates the Relvas Law, as it took place in 2012 when the Lisbon City Council (then chaired by António Costa) decided to implement an administrative reorganization of the city. One of the changes grouped Mártires, Sacramento, São Nicolau, Madalena, Santa Justa, Sé, Santiago, São Cristóvão and São Lourenço, Castelo, Socorro, São Miguel and Santo Estêvão into a new parish: Santa Maria Maior. At that time, the capital went from 53 parishes to the current 24.
The parishes added in 2013, as imposed by the Troika, and which now wish to separate, had until December 2022 to send the necessary documentation. The Relvas Law – No. 11-A/2013, of January 28 – has since been repealed by another diploma, Law No. 39/2021, of June 24, which subsequently entailed the possibility, if this were the case the intention is to enable the separation of parishes by means of certain rules.
According to the diploma, some technical aspects must be fulfilled together, such as the service provided to the population or the viability of the economic-financial plan.
And it is in this plan that, as DN knows, some parishes seeking separation have failed. According to a parliamentary source, the majority of the requests already verified (almost 70) lack documentation. The Municipal Councils were informed so that the defects could be remedied. According to the same source, most of the missing documentation was of an economic and financial nature.
To assess these requests, the Public Administration, Spatial Planning and Local Government Committee has asked the general secretariat of Parliament to set up a technical analysis committee consisting of lawyers. An internal database was also created to aggregate the processes. If approved, all these changes will only come into effect after the next municipal council, in 2025.
According to the data provided to DN – which is organized by district – Braga is the place where the most parishes want to be separated (31), followed by the districts of Porto and Aveiro.
Questioned by DN, Miguel Relvas said that the administrative reform took place because “it was in line with what the Troika demanded” and referred for further explanation to the book he published in 2015 (The other side of the board).
In the book, Miguel Relvas begins by considering the reform “a remarkable success”. At the heart of the decision, says Relvas, were four dimensions: ‘Reducing the number of local entities’, ‘reaffirming the desire to reorganize’, ‘municipal, inter-municipal management and financing’ and ‘greater local democracy, the debate on promote the new situation’. card legal”. In short, it all comes down to one rule: “Without a doubt, reduce costs.”
Names are yet to be announced
For now, the list of parishes that have requested desegregation is unknown. However, a quick search reveals at least two unions that want to separate: Camarate, Unhos and Apelação (in the municipality of Loures, Lisbon district) and Lousã and Vilarinho (municipality of Lousã, Coimbra district). Other cases are, for example, the parishes of the Union of Aljustrel and Rio de Moinhos (municipality of Aljustrel, district of Beja) or the Union of São Cosme, Jovim and Valbom, and in the latter case the Chamber of Gondomar – of PS majority – approved the desegregation did not go well and the trial did not follow.
With regard to Camarate, an opinion from the parish council states that, despite the progress made after the union – such as the strengthening of the workforce or the construction of more infrastructure to support the population – the decision is favorable, especially because, it states In the document, “the deadline for the ruling is very short and this limits the serious consultation of the population”, who spoke out against this decision at the time of the merger.
Anafre criticizes the process
Despite the demands for desegregation that see the separation as something positive, the National Association of Parishes (Anafre) does not agree with the implementation of the work, mainly because of the set deadlines that it believes should be further extended.
In May, Anafre stated that she “clearly disagrees with the working group” that addressed the issue in parliament. As the association’s vice-president, Jorge Amador, stated in Parliament, the aggregation process did not solve any “economic problem in Portugal” and only happened because “there was no courage to go elsewhere” to make cuts. On deadlines, he said: “We support our position with the respect that local bodies deserve from us and with respect for entities such as the Constitutional Court and the Regional Coordination and Development Commissions.” DN contacted Anafre about the subject, but did not respond in a timely manner.
*with PEDRO SEQUIRA
[email protected]
Source: DN
