Xavier Espot: “Andorra cannot continue to grow like this”
Today marks the beginning of the general policy debate in the Andorran parliament. We take the opportunity to interview Xavier Espot, head of government, and review the first two years of his final term. On the table are some of the most important matters of recent times. Espot is determined to close a number of key institutional issues that will lay the groundwork for the country’s future. Among them: the association agreement with the European Union, the decriminalisation of abortion, and the housing crisis. We speak about all of this in his office.
—You’ve passed the halfway point of your final term. How do you assess it?
—I understand that it’s up to the citizens to scrutinise our work. But if you ask for my opinion, and without wanting to be self-congratulatory, I think we’re doing well in fulfilling the commitments we made in the last election and during my investiture. We’ve taken decisive action on housing. For the first time, we’re creating a public stock of rental housing, which will reach five hundred flats by the end of this term. We’ve already invested millions of euros. This is our real priority. We’ve also worked to improve purchasing power: the minimum wage has increased by 30% over six years. We’ve made public transport free and we continue to work toward our major goal—reaching a good association agreement with the European Union. This is with a view to the Andorra of the next ten, fifteen or twenty years. A country that must diversify its economy through added value, innovation, and sectors that bring prosperity.
—You mentioned the association agreement with the EU. What is its current status? Is it faltering?
—Not at all. With an agreement of this magnitude and scope, patience is needed. Much of the negotiation happens behind closed doors, and I’m confident it will be successful. This is the most comprehensive agreement the EU has ever negotiated with a third country. It’s normal that, now that the text is ready, it faces further analysis and questions that delay the process. But this is a project for Andorra’s future, and if it takes another six months to fine-tune it and make sure it protects our national interests, then it’s time and effort well spent. I’m convinced it will eventually be approved unanimously by EU member states, and we’re working to ensure it’s classified as an “EU-only” agreement—meaning it wouldn’t require ratification by national parliaments.
—What would it mean if it weren’t?
—It wouldn’t jeopardise the agreement, but it would mean that, instead of just Andorra and the European Parliament ratifying it, every member state would have to do so, and that always brings potential complications and delays.
—What role does France play in this process?
—France has always been a privileged ally, as has Spain. They’ve helped to make this agreement a reality. France may have some reservations about the legal nature of the agreement—not the content itself—which is important for future trade deals that might affect French national interests. We’re working discreetly on a diplomatic solution that works for everyone. That said, France has consistently supported this agreement, including its favourable terms for Andorra, and remains committed to approving the text.
—Do you think the agreement will be approved before the end of the term?
—Yes, I believe it will happen during this legislature.
—So there will be a referendum in this term?
—Once the process is complete—that is, once the Council of the EU, the European Commission, and the government of Andorra (the negotiating parties) have signed the agreement—it will go to the European Parliament for ratification. Once that happens, we’ve committed to holding a binding referendum before Andorra ratifies it.
—Polls show a majority against the agreement. Do you understand the public’s concern?
—Yes and no. I understand it because of today’s complex geopolitical context. It’s true that the European project doesn’t always generate enthusiasm—often unfairly, as it’s blamed for problems that come from the member states or external factors. I still believe in Europe as a project of prosperity, social cohesion, and environmental sustainability. And in a world increasingly divided into blocs, we benefit from being part of the European bloc. We’ll be stronger and better able to defend our interests together than alone. But yes, there’s a perception—especially among Andorrans who’ve had a relatively comfortable life despite challenges and growing social cohesion in recent years—that this agreement might end that. It’s actually the opposite: this agreement is the best guarantee, paradoxically, of preserving the status quo.
—Why is that?
—Because our economic sectors are very mature. Betting everything on keeping things as they are is difficult. Sometimes, change is necessary to take a leap forward and preserve what’s valuable. We’ll need to convince people that this agreement won’t undermine our low-tax model or our immigration policy. On the contrary, it will allow us to diversify the economy, maintain public revenue levels, and continue the social and environmental policies our citizens expect.
—Do you see an alternative to the association agreement? Some groups have called for renegotiation.
—Suggesting we could now knock on Brussels’s door and start fresh after nine years of negotiation—at a time when the EU is focused on the U.S. tariffs, the war in Ukraine, and the Middle East—is naive and disconnected from reality. That doesn’t mean we’re giving in. But we must be realistic. We now have a good instrument, well negotiated, and we must use it fully.
—Speaking of Europe, Catalan might soon become an official EU language. Would that help Andorra?
—Absolutely. We’ve always offered our support and done our part to help make that happen, for two reasons. First, a pragmatic one: if Catalan becomes an official EU language, all EU legislation will automatically be translated into Catalan. That means we won’t have to translate it ourselves in Andorra, which will be essential once the association agreement is in force and we begin integrating the EU acquis into our legal system. Second, it raises the status of our language. So it’s a milestone we fully support, and we’re aligned with the Spanish government on this matter. That said, we’re not an EU member state, nor do we aim to become one, so we can’t demand that Catalan be made official in the EU.
—Another key issue of this term was the passage of the Catalan language law. In just over a year, thirty disciplinary cases have been opened, and two resulted in sanctions. Are these low figures? Concòrdia says filing a complaint is too difficult.
—It depends how you look at it. Thirty cases, given Andorra’s size, is not bad. Only two have resulted in sanctions so far, but many are still being processed. In any case, we should focus more on the law’s deterrent and preventive effects than on punitive outcomes. The main goal is to change mindsets and encourage proactive efforts by citizens. And the best proof is that enrolment in Catalan language courses has grown exponentially. Whether out of personal conviction or because we now require proof of a minimum Catalan level to renew residence permits, more people are learning Catalan—and thus, more people are speaking it. So the real measure of the law’s success will be the results of the next language use survey: if we see significantly more people using, speaking, and writing Catalan, we’ll know the law was effective.
—You spoke of a change in mentality. Does this require civic engagement?
—Absolutely. Language should never be a tool of opposition; it must be a tool of belonging. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t have coercive mechanisms at times—there are rights to be enforced, and sometimes enforcement means obliging the other party to comply. But ultimately, if we want Catalan to flourish and become the dominant language in social settings, it must happen through attraction and engagement. I believe this law includes mechanisms that support that approach. I’m hopeful we’ll turn things around. The most recent survey already showed more positive results than the previous one. Even before this law, we had good language policy in place—and now we’re consolidating it.
—The situation is improving in Andorra, but not necessarily in the rest of the Catalan-speaking territories. Should closer ties be built with other institutions?
—Each territory has its own context, its own identity, and its own policies. We have one big advantage: Catalan is the sole official language. But that’s not enough. There must also be civic adherence to the language, and it needs to be prestigious. That calls for active promotion by public institutions. The alternative languages are spoken by hundreds of millions—500 or 1,000 million people—and without proactive policies, it’s hard to reverse the trend toward dominance. This must be entirely compatible with defending linguistic diversity and cultural plurality, if I may use that term. So making Catalan the dominant language in society must coexist with the reality that, in Andorra, both Spanish and French are also widely spoken—as they’re the official languages of our two neighbours—and of course English, which serves as a lingua franca.
—Another major issue this term is abortion. You’ve said it will be decriminalised before the term ends.
—Yes, it’s one of our commitments, and we’re moving forward with firm but discreet steps. We want to preserve our institutional structure, because it guarantees our independence and Andorra’s identity. Legalising abortion here would be incompatible with that. But between where we are now and full legalisation, there’s a middle ground: decriminalisation. That means no criminal penalties for women who choose to terminate a pregnancy. And beyond that, we want to create a support system so that women who make that decision—freely and voluntarily—receive full assistance from Andorran authorities, even if they can’t have the procedure done here. They should be supported and reimbursed, especially women in vulnerable situations, so that they can act freely and without coercion. That’s what we’re working toward: a compromise that advances women’s rights while preserving our unique institutional system.
—The episcopal co-prince plays a key role here. The new co-prince, Josep Lluís Serrano, recently said dialogue is needed to find a plausible solution. How do you interpret those words?
—I think his remarks are quite aligned with what I’ve just said. Nothing is purely black or white. The Catholic Church has dogmas, and those by definition don’t allow concessions. But that doesn’t mean the Church advocates criminal punishment for women who have abortions. I believe a solution can be found.
—So your proposal is for Andorran women to travel abroad for abortions?
—Exactly. They would go through a support service here in Andorra, and then be accompanied to a place where the procedure is safe, discreet, and practical. Afterwards, the costs would be reimbursed if the woman is in a vulnerable situation and meets the criteria.
—With the appointment of a new episcopal co-prince, do you expect any changes for Andorra’s interests?
—No, we see it as a continuation, which is what we hoped for. It was especially important to avoid a vacancy, because the role also entails being a head of state. Leaving that post vacant—or vacant for too long—would have been problematic for Andorra. We still have a co-prince who speaks our language, understands our culture, and has spent almost a year alongside the previous co-prince. So he understands what it means to be co-prince, beyond just being bishop. I’m confident we’ll maintain our excellent institutional relationship and continue to have a head of state who is authentically Andorran in the best sense of the word.
—As for the other co-prince, there’s a chance the far right could win in France soon. Do you worry this might affect Andorra’s interests?
—It’s true that the president of France automatically becomes co-prince, and the choice of who becomes president is not ours to make. So we’ll assess the situation depending on how things unfold. But I don’t think we should engage in political speculation. Whoever it is, the key will be to maintain institutional harmony and ensure our system remains intact.
—Housing has also been a defining issue of this term. Do you think the situation will stabilise by 2027, when rent caps are due to expire?
—I truly hope so. But calling it a “normalised” situation implies that the housing problem is temporary. Unfortunately, in Andorra—as elsewhere—it’s become structural. We often blame real estate speculation, which certainly doesn’t help, but it’s not the only factor. Family structures are changing, and so is the tourism model. Changing that is difficult, especially in a country like Andorra, where until recently, we didn’t even recognise the need for a public rental housing stock, despite having one of the highest rates of renters. In any case, we’re working to address citizens’ legitimate concerns, through many reforms.
—What measures have been taken?
—I mentioned the creation of a public rental stock. We’ve also passed a very ambitious housing law that has been politically costly. Around 30% of tourist rentals will lose their licences and return to the residential market. If you own a vacant flat, you must justify keeping it off the market; otherwise, it must be offered for rent. We’ve also raised capital gains taxes on property and limited how many properties foreigners or prospective residents can acquire. We’ve pulled every possible lever with moderation and a centrist approach to achieve the goal that everyone in our country can access decent housing.
—Can Andorra continue growing in population and construction as it has until now?
—No, and that’s why we’ve adopted the measures we have. Thanks to them, population growth has halved—from nearly 5% in 2023 to just over 2% last year. This wasn’t due to economic slowdown but to government policies, like reducing immigration quotas—even at some political cost. Just this weekend, we saw protests from the restaurant, hotel, and tourism sectors, asking—quite reasonably—for more foreign workers. But we also have to recognise the housing and sustainability challenges we face. Rapid population growth creates wealth for certain sectors, which can benefit the broader public, but it also generates serious problems. We must strike the right balance.
—You’ve said that Andorra is reaching the limits of its tourism model.
—We currently receive about ten million tourists a year. That’s enormous, considering our small size and population. We’re not aiming to reduce those numbers, but Andorra cannot continue growing like this. We need to maintain tourist volume while increasing their purchasing power.
—So an economic model shift is needed?
—We need to diversify our economy. That means preserving traditional sectors while recognising their limits and growth potential, and balancing that with new, value-added sectors.
—Changing topics: on July 15, one of the BPA court rulings will be issued. Do you think all the questions around the case have been answered?
—The BPA [Banca Privada d’Andorra] case has many layers, and this ruling will only address one part. I’ve always said: whatever happened between the Spanish police and former Spanish officials—or even with American authorities—I don’t know. But I can speak about what Andorran political leaders, financial institutions, anti-money laundering agencies, and the government experienced. And that is well known: there was a FinCEN notice stating that BPA posed a high risk of money laundering, listing numerous cases. That caused correspondent banks to immediately cut ties—not just with BPA, but with all Andorran banks, fearing contamination. Anyone familiar with banking knows that this spelled death for our financial system, with major consequences for jobs, client deposits, and the country’s survival. We did what had to be done—and time has proven us right. We intervened in BPA and launched a resolution process that saved our financial system, protected BPA’s jobs, and guaranteed clean client deposits. I believe we acted correctly. As for what happened beyond that, I don’t know. And frankly, other than some alleged emails from Mr Villarejo—hardly a credible figure—I haven’t seen solid evidence of those alleged connections.
—Reports have emerged about Spanish officials accessing client databases or pressuring Andorran authorities.
—I can assure you there was no pressure. When Mr Rajoy visited Andorra in January 2015, there was no mention—at any point—of a possible intervention in BPA, not with the then head of government, nor with any of the relevant ministers.