Pedro Sánchez denied his Government's responsibility in the railway massacres and defended Óscar Puente

Pedro Sánchez's interview with YouTuber Jordi Wild on his podcast The Wild Project revealed the difficulties faced by the Prime Minister in responding to some of the most questioned episodes of his administration. During the conversation, the socialist leader was asked about the railway tragedies in Adamuz and Urda, which resulted in 115 deaths, but he avoided taking political responsibility and defended the actions of his government.

One of the tensest moments came when Wild asked why there were no resignations or immediate dismissals after the two accidents. The question pointed directly to the responsibility of the Ministry of Transport and the continuity of its main political leaders, in a context of growing concern about the safety of the Spanish railway system.

However, Sánchez rejected that his government's decisions had a direct impact on the tragedies and avoided clarifying whether he would have removed the then Minister of Transport, Óscar Puente, had he not resigned.

Instead of providing concrete explanations about the prior warnings and possible maintenance and safety failures, the president chose to highlight his government's management and shift part of the responsibilities to previous administrations.

Sánchez denied responsibility for the Adamuz and Urda accidents

Wild insisted that two railway accidents of such severity could not go without political consequences. He also questioned whether, after the tragedies, citizens had reasons to distrust the safety of Spanish high-speed rail.

In response to these questions, Sánchez asserted that he did not believe that the decisions made by his government or the Ministry of Transport had directly contributed to the accidents.

"If what you are asking me is whether the decisions made by the Government of Spain and in particular the Minister of Transport have directly affected this catastrophe. In my opinion, no," he stated.

The president also acknowledged that there were failures in the control systems and that it was necessary to improve training and safety mechanisms. Among the measures he mentioned, he highlighted the incorporation of additional systems, similar to those used in aviation, such as the double signature mechanism.

Nevertheless, his explanations left unresolved one of the main questions of the interview: why the prior warnings about the state of the railway infrastructure did not lead to sufficient measures before the tragedies occurred.

The defense of Óscar Puente and the absence of resignations

Another of the most uncomfortable moments for Sánchez came when Jordi Wild asked him why no political leader had been removed immediately after the accidents.

The president openly defended Óscar Puente and considered that his actions had been appropriate for having maintained contact with the victims, appearing before the press, and explaining his management before Congress.

"Óscar Puente, after having been with the victims, having faced the press, having spoken with the technicians, and having appeared in Congress has done well to step aside," he maintained.

Sánchez also revealed that it was Puente himself who informed him that he should resign and that he accepted his decision. However, he did not directly respond whether he would have taken the initiative to dismiss him had he not received that proposal.

The explanation did not satisfy Wild, who again questioned the lack of political consequences after two disasters that left over a hundred fatalities.

Sánchez again blamed Mariano Rajoy for the state of the trains

In response to questions about the state of the railway infrastructure, Sánchez resorted to one of the usual arguments in his political discourse: blaming the previous Popular Party government for the alleged lack of investments.

"In hindsight, any investment was insufficient. In eight years of government, we have had to reverse the underinvestment. It took us fifteen years to reverse the cuts from Mariano Rajoy's government. In the line where the two accidents occurred, we have multiplied the investment by 20," he asserted.

The president also defended that his government had modernized the railway system, although he acknowledged that the works and interventions on the infrastructure had caused more breakdowns and incidents.

According to his argument, the increase in users and the reduction of high-speed prices demonstrated the advancements of the system, which he described as safe.

However, this defense contrasted with the concern expressed by Wild about citizens' trust after the accidents.

The comparison with the DANA and criticisms of the PP

In another part of the conversation, Sánchez tried to differentiate his actions from those of former Valencian president Carlos Mazón during the DANA, denying that his government had incurred responsibilities by omission.

The socialist leader maintained that his government had acted correctly before, during, and after the railway tragedies. He also defended that his presence before the victims, workers, and investigators demonstrated that he had assumed his obligations.

To reinforce his argument, he recalled the railway accident in Angrois, in which 79 people died, and questioned whether the PSOE had then demanded the resignation of Mariano Rajoy's Minister of Development, Ana Pastor.

"What polarizes is using pain in an electoral campaign," Sánchez stated, in a criticism directed at those who question his government's response.

Finally, the president assured that he always demands excellence from his ministers and that he conducts a self-evaluation when he believes something has not been done correctly. However, his statements in the interview left a contradiction difficult to ignore: while he acknowledged that the railway system needs improvements and that there were security failures, he dismissed that the decisions of his own government had direct responsibility for the tragedies.