Canarian Parliament defends Hondius management and criticizes state coordination

A parliamentary spokesperson highlights Canarian responsibility during the cruise crisis and the demand for information and guarantees.

Generic image of a microphone on a parliamentary podium, symbolizing political debate.
IA

Generic image of a microphone on a parliamentary podium, symbolizing political debate.

A spokesperson for the Canarian Nationalist Parliamentary Group today defended the management of the Canarian Government and its president during the health crisis of the Hondius cruise ship, criticizing the lack of coordination and the “simplistic narrative” of the Spanish Government.

The representative of the Canarian Nationalist Parliamentary Group (Coalición Canaria) stated that Canarias acted with “responsibility, prudence, and institutional respect” in the face of the international emergency caused by the Andes hantavirus outbreak on the Hondius cruise ship. He highlighted that the region has demonstrated its solidarity in various crises, such as the migratory one, and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Canarias knows perfectly what it means to help. We have been doing it for years, with our own resources, with professionals pushed to their limits, and with an enormous capacity for response. What the Government of Canarias has done in this case was not to deny help, but to demand information, coordination, and guarantees."

a spokesperson for the Canarian Nationalist Parliamentary Group
The CC deputy criticized the “simplistic narrative” promoted by the Spanish Government and the PSOE, which, in his opinion, tried to portray Madrid as the scientific authority and Canarias as synonymous with fear. He stressed that the autonomous community did not seek to alarm, but to obtain precise information, coordinate actions, and ensure the safety of the population and workers.
It was recalled that the MV Hondius was linked to an Andes hantavirus outbreak that had caused deaths and confirmed cases, a situation that required the intervention of the WHO, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), the Spanish Government, and European authorities. Although the risk was low, it was argued that this did not imply improvisation, but the application of clear protocols and rigorous preventive measures.
The Canarian Executive requested from the outset detailed health information on passengers and crew, minimizing the operational time in the islands, and mobilizing necessary resources to avoid unnecessary risks. PCR tests were also requested before disembarkation, regretting that the state protocol did not include this measure. The appearance of positive cases after disembarkation validated the Canarian stance of requesting additional tests as a protective barrier.
Finally, the nationalist spokesperson criticized the lack of institutional coordination and the treatment received by the Government of Canarias. He acknowledged the efforts of the Guardia Civil, National Police, UME, External Health, port personnel, health services, and technical teams, but insisted that their professionalism does not dispel doubts about political decisions and the opacity in management. He concluded by reaffirming that Canarias is a supportive land, but not “blindly obedient,” and will defend the health, safety, and dignity of its people.