Former minister José Luis Escrivá authorised a deferment of 46 instalments to Plus Ultra in October 2020, a month after José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero met with him. The airline had been in debt since 2017.
The bailout of €53 million to Plus Ultra continues to raise questions. New data reveals that the then Minister of Social Security, José Luis Escrivá, granted the airline a deferment of 46 monthly instalments to pay €451,954 of debts accumulated between 2017 and May 2020. The decision was made in October 2020, just a month after José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero met with Escrivá.
A suspicious timeline
Social Security certificates stated that Plus Ultra was "up to date with payments" as of 31 December 2019 and 2020. However, the reality was very different: the company had been carrying debts that had been successively deferred since 2017. The new agreement suspended the urgency with surcharges of 20-35% in case of non-payment.
93.8% of that debt with Social Security was paid after Plus Ultra received the €53 million from SEPI, then led by María Jesús Montero. In other words, the state lent public money to a delinquent company so that it could pay the state itself. The creditor financing the debtor.
An unprofitable airline
Plus Ultra was a marginal airline, with chronic losses and no profits since its inception. It had little presence in the Spanish air market. Nevertheless, it was declared "strategic" and saved with public money during the pandemic. It did not meet the economic requirements for the bailout nor was it essential for the sector.
The company has never repaid the bailout money. The case is being investigated by the judiciary, and Escrivá, now under scrutiny, will have to explain himself before the judge.
What it means for the taxpayer
For readers interested in the use of public money, this case highlights a possible irregular use of bailout mechanisms. The deferment of debts and contradictory certificates suggest that Plus Ultra's financial situation may have been manipulated to make the aid viable. Those paying attention to the management of public funds should know that the operation remains unclear and that the judiciary must determine whether there was malfeasance or misappropriation.
The next step will be Escrivá's appearance before the judge, where he will have to explain the criteria that led to the approval of the deferment and the bailout. The public deserves to know the full truth.
You may also like
