Tensions in Spanish politics rose after Vicent Mompó, president of the Diputación de Valencia, answered criticism from Science Minister Diana Morant with a string of personal insults. The dispute followed accusations about his handling of the storm that hit Valencia on 29 October 2024 and killed 232 people. Court documents cited by El Economista and Ara confirm the death toll was updated after another victim died in hospital on 6 November.
Mompó, a senior member of the Partido Popular in Valencia, posted on X, calling Morant “the daughter of Zapatero, the lameculos of Sánchez” and saying she was “worthless.” Writing in Valencian, he accused Morant of seeking media attention instead of focusing on people affected by the disaster. He also claimed she visited the region only two days after the storm, arriving by helicopter with Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.
The judicial investigation into the management of the DANA flooding remains active. The judge in Catarroja is considering a six-month extension to the proceedings.
The exchange began after Morant sharply criticized Mompó’s actions during the storm. She said the Diputación de Valencia warned its own staff and suspended activities because of the DANA, a severe weather event, but Mompó failed to inform the wider public about those measures. Morant said he limited warnings to his inner circle, leaving most people unprepared. Several Spanish media outlets reported that only nine training courses were suspended and the general public received no direct notification.
Morant cited a news report stating that the provincial council had notified its political leadership and suspended nine training courses as the storm approached. She argued that Mompó, who was at the emergency coordination center (CECOPI), knew the risks but did not extend the same warnings to all Valencians. Morant continues to argue that earlier public alerts could have changed the outcome for many victims, keeping debate over the Es-Alert system in focus, as RTVE and València Diari have reported.
Socialist Party officials quickly condemned Mompó’s remarks. Pilar Bernabé, the PSOE’s Equality Secretary and government delegate in the region, called the comments “barbaric” and questioned the boundaries of political debate. Rebeca Torró, the party’s Organization Secretary, demanded that national PP leader Alberto Núñez Feijóo publicly distance himself from Mompó and call for an immediate apology. Democrata reported that the demands reflect growing scrutiny of public officials after the tragedy.
Morant’s position remains firm: she directly links the delay in public warnings to the high number of fatalities and repeatedly says earlier alerts could have saved lives. The dispute over the Es-Alert system and the authorities’ response remains a political and legal flashpoint in Valencia.
RTVE
During the storm, the Diputación de Valencia followed its usual protocol with the workers’ committee: when the national weather agency Aemet issues a red alert for rain, staff are sent home and preventive measures begin. The basic dispute is whether the institution communicated these warnings and actions beyond its own employees. The controversy has also raised questions about emergency protocols and how openly authorities share information during a crisis, information from several Spanish news outlets.
The episode has renewed debate over public officials’ responsibilities during emergencies and the tone of political debate in Spain. The scale of the tragedy, with 232 deaths, has intensified scrutiny of every decision and public statement. Both sides aired their confrontation on social media, adding to concerns about the decline of restraint in Spanish political life.
Spain has faced several extreme weather events in recent years. DANA storms have brought repeated flooding and loss of life, especially in Mediterranean regions. The Aemet red alert protocol is intended to reduce risk, but its success depends on timely, clear communication with the public. The clash between Mompó and Morant has put institutional credibility and public trust in crisis management under scrutiny. Their personal attacks have diverted attention from the disputed decisions, while questions about accountability and public warnings remain unresolved.
