Spain's big controversies: vaccines, sick leave and defense spending

Several measures attributed to Pedro Sánchez's government —a fine of up to €60,000 for refusing vaccination, private management of sick leave and increased defense spending— have sparked strong social backlash. To these are added the debate over tolls on dual carriageways and the removal of cars over ten years old.

## The €60,000 fine for not getting vaccinated

The figure keeps circulating: **€60,000** as a penalty for anyone who refuses to get vaccinated. The reality is more nuanced. That amount appears in the consolidated text of the General Public Health Law of **2011**, which provides for very serious penalties for endangering collective health. It is not an automatic fine for saying no to a vaccine.

The government itself has stated that «no one has been forced to get vaccinated». Vaccination in Spain is voluntary and remains so. That said, the law does provide for penalties in extreme cases, which are rarely applied.

## Tolls on dual carriageways and cars over ten years old

Brussels has been recommending for years that those who use the roads should pay for them. Spain is one of the few EU countries without widespread tolls on dual carriageways. The government has defended that it will not introduce them unless required by EU law, although the European Commission insists on the «polluter pays» principle.

In parallel, there has been discussion about phasing out passenger cars over **ten years** old due to their emissions. The measure would affect millions of vehicles. There is no official timetable or detail on how owners would be compensated.

## Sick leave managed by employers

The debate over privatizing the management of sick leave points to mutual insurance companies (mutuas) and employers themselves taking control of absenteeism. Family doctors warn that this breaks the impartiality of the medical certificate. A doctor who depends on the employer is not the same as one who depends on the public system.

## Defense and the relationship with Trump

The increase in defense spending to **2% of GDP** —a commitment made to NATO— has peine the controversy. Part of that effort is seen as a way to appease **Donald Trump**, who has threatened to raise tariffs and has boasted about quadrupling the price of medicines in the United States. The paradox is obvious: more is spent on weapons for an ally that pressures with price hikes.

These measures touch money, jobs and health. Before taking any figure at face value, it is worth checking the official source.