Pedro Sánchez's latest policy trade-off shows once again that it's Catalan separatists, not the Socialist-led coalition, who are really running the country. It was only by scrapping an extension to a windfall tax on energy companies - a measure Sánchez failed to sneak through congress last week - that the prime minister secured the votes of pro-independence Junts per Catalunya for a pensions increase. But the prospect of a no-confidence vote, first proposed by Junts before Christmas, still hangs over the Socialist leader. It shouldn't.

Junts has so far been the only party to suggest a confidence vote against Sánchez, although the PP has had many occasions on which to do so since he came to power in 2018 (by using the same mechanism to end Mariano Rajoy's premiership). As a result of this week's deal between the government and Catalan separatists, parliament may still have to debate the idea, depending on what's decided by the Congress bureau; but Sánchez has said that he sees 'no reason' to submit to such a vote.

Regular readers of this column will no doubt be surprised when I say that I'm with Sánchez on this one. There have been several issues which the opposition should have seized on as the basis for a no-confidence vote against the PSOE leader: his imposition of an illegal lockdown; allegations that his government employed digital espionage against Catalan separatists; the amnesty deal; and the Koldo face mask scandal.

All of those matters called into question the competence and integrity of Sánchez's government, and were therefore in the general public interest. Each one of them should have caused his downfall, and perhaps the Koldo scandal, which is ongoing, eventually will. But given that Sánchez remains in power, his refusal to comply with Junts' attempts at blackmail isn't good enough reason for a no-confidence vote. Or rather, it wouldn't be if he did sometimes say no to the separatists, instead of always giving them what they want.

There's a parallel here with Sánchez's resignation stunt last April. As a critic of the prime minister, I was briefly excited at the prospect of his departure, before I realised that, no, it shouldn't happen like this. The Begoña Gómez affair raised the question of why Sánchez considered a flimsy corruption charge against his wife more serious than any of the issues mentioned above. Perhaps he didn't, which would explain a lot. Instead of being an admission of failure, a departure in defence of his wife would have looked noble, selfless, principled. It would have boosted, not ended, his political career.

Sánchez could also play the victim card if he were pushed out by separatists. Which is why he shouldn't go - not over this. Junts' proposed no-confidence vote against the prime minister is a classic case of too little, too late.