But some suspicions and clues are also emerging more and more clearly: If Madrid does not lead to a pact, Ibarretxe will not engage in direct and transparent interrogation, initiating a scheme commonly understood as democratic confrontation in the nationalist camp. In the PNV there is no clear position for this and among the forces in favor of self-determination in Basque society there are no conditions and probably no will for the accumulation of forces required by such a situation.

In this sense, the ELA and LAB have no reason to believe that when you give in to smaller day-to-day struggles, you can hardly believe that one will take such a big step in one. The case of improvement has been cited by the patriotic trade unions, as the Government has agreed in September to allow this institution to operate with INEM money. The ELA and the LAB usually ask to be financed with government money and then to remove this from the quota to be paid to the State. The trade unions’ proposal, however, was not new. Three years ago, the Ibarretxe government itself, in an ostentatious public appearance, asked Madrid to channel the transfer of the 37 missing handouts, which, if not, would be taken over and discounted from the quota. None of this has happened. Distrust, therefore, has a basis.

What if there is no question? There is a hypothesis of a mere advance of the elections. Ibarretxe would put the plan of the questionnaire on the front line of the PNV program and seek the support of the population. Too many dreams for such a short trip. When it comes to answering yes, and standing in Madrid as the representative of the citizens of the Basque Country, Ibarretxe could collect a very high number of patriotic votes, but not in a simple election of the Basque Country in which several parties have to vote, even giving them the desired singularity.

EA, for example, will look suspiciously at Joseba Egibar when he says that the vote should be concentrated around the president. If the option, as in 2001, is not to reconvene the PNV. And this option, yes, has much more credibility. Perfectly legitimate, but it would have nothing to do with the script presented by Ibarretxe in Parliament at the end of September.

There has also been much talk about the danger that the President of Vitoria-Gasteiz has taken with this project. It seems vital to him. The bet he made on the PNV looks like that, too. And it may be so. There seems to be an acquired tendency towards danger, but there is no more room for it. In his 2005 interview for Luz, he made it clear that this was the last chance – of the process that was about to open – that otherwise he would go home and another generation would have to take over.

And what about Loyola? The comment goes from tooth to tooth: Should Loyola's achievements be flushed down the toilet? In the non-patriotic zone there is a significant voice that thinks that the interrogation of Ibarretxe is only an obstacle and that it would be more productive to continue pulling the thread of Loyola, because there a principle of agreement between the main sensibilities of this country was reached. If the truce is a thread that can be pulled even if it is broken, then it should be pulled.