The article La motosierra puede ser tentadora, written in recent days by the lawyer Larraitz Ugarte, has played an important role in a wide sector. It puts on the table some common situations within the public administration, including inefficiency, lack of responsibility and control and inappropriate attitudes towards the work of some employees. Shortly afterwards came the response of Igor Eizagirre, Head of Public Services at ELA, The Motosier of the Oligarchs or The Forest Care? with the article, in which he gives some data of the policy developed by neoliberalism in public services and criticizes Ugarte's article for representing the aforementioned situations as first problems.

The discussion is substantial and, in fact, I thought the reflection contained in Larraitz Ugarte's article was essential. Indispensable and courageous, although for many it is not politically correct and we must hear that it paves the way for the privatizers. Fortifying in the defense of the public is fine, but in the face of certain situations that are evident in the public system, including attitudes that can be reproached to some workers, looking the other way doesn’t do any good.

The biggest problem with public services is the lack of funding. Well... the biggest problem is that public services are in the hands of those who operate from the capitalist logic, where all too often the channelling of public money to private companies is a hidden objective, either through the correct privatization of services or through the slimming of public structures through subcontracts. When there are insufficient resources, it is difficult to provide an adequate service, despite the fact that many workers are very courageous in responding to their responsibilities, sometimes overburdening and compromising their physical, mental and social health. However, the inefficiency, dysfunctions, lack of minimum tension, bureaucracy and attitudes of some staff in many areas of public administration cannot be covered. The bureaucracy and the disorganization of the organization of the service cannot justify the demand, the negligence, the carelessness, the despotism, the inbreeding, the irresponsibility, the empathy with the citizens 0 and/or the absenteeism sought by traps. Cases of parasitism are not few within the administration and, in addition to wasting resources, they worsen the service and pollute the work environment. And, needless to say, those who walk in such positions are not usually those who fight on the front lines in the defense of the public sector.

To focus on all these administrative failures is not to give arguments to the liberals and pave the way for them to act against public services. In addition to the existence of such situations in private companies, the interested disrepute of the public of the system has long been encouraged by the capitalists, who will continue to give excessive importance to the errors and deficiencies of the public system in order to spread the social perception that is useful in their interest. They don’t need a lot of excuses; some specific facts are enough to build the reality they need. We see something like this with occupation, migration or street security. If there are such problems in the public sector, they are obvious, and in the face of such improper practices (whether of the high office or of the last subordinate of the structure), measures must be taken to improve the public system itself, to defend the public system, as well as to move many of the services that are now private to the public sphere later and to extend public control and management to strategic areas of the economy (energy, communications, transport, etc.). The lack of due attention to the deficiencies of the public system and the failure to implement firm corrective measures to achieve a better, more efficient, more dynamic public system lead to the progressive corruption of the public system and, of course, gives the privatizing traders an advantage in their intentions.

On another level, something like this has been observed in some models that throughout history have tried to develop socialist planning, in which, among other crucial elements (the constant aggression of imperialism being the main one), bureaucracy, inefficiency, paternalism, lack of tension and lack of internal criticism have done much damage to consolidate the project.

Going back to the beginning of this text, to point out the aforementioned is not to facilitate the entry of the chainsaw into the forest, but to take better care of the forest, even from the inside, controlling, among other things, the weeds and diseases and combating the invasive species that are spread, in order to reproduce healthy vegetation and spread the forest to the mountains and valleys. The fire of capital is waiting to enter the communal forest. The Pyromani, in their capacity as heads of companies, investment funds and/or institutions, are walking around to progressively burn the communal forest, trying to turn it into a private forest where windmills and pine insignis will be the masters. In addition to replacing forest rangers, prevention work within the forest is essential, and these initiatives include maintenance to reduce the dry weed that contributes to the spread of fire.

Iñaki Etaio, internationalist