Something strange is going on in Spain. As first noted here, President Clinton was reported in El Mundo this weekend as admitting that Dr. Gabriel Calzada’s study out of Madrid’s King Juan Carlos University shows that “green jobs” programs have actually cost Spain many jobs. Then, a WSJ blogger noted that the official transcript reflected that Clinton said something rather less politically harmful.

The problem is, Clinton was heard by several reporters as having said what El Mundo reported and quite contrary to the subsequently issued transcript — as noted by Expansión (from Google translate):

Clinton: “The clean energy cost many jobs in Spain”
Posted by: M. TejoExpansion
Former U.S. president himself yesterday a big advocate of green energy. During the conference hosted yesterday at the European University of Madrid called on governments to assimilate what he called “the task of the twenty-first century.”
Namely: “Save the world from climate change, regenerate the economy and create jobs.” However, Clinton acknowledged, referring to the Spanish case, the complexity of this aim may be. “I know that in Spain there is a commitment to clean energy, although that has cost many jobs,” he said.
The former president was a Democrat so, indirectly, to the “controversy” that has caused the recent report by the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (Effects of public support for renewable energy) which ensures that every job in renewable energy created in Spain since 2000 has cost 571,138 euros and has led to the loss of 2.2 jobs in other sectors more efficient, as announced on March 27 EXPANSION.
However, Clinton avoided too much into the controversy about that Spain is devoting considerable energy budget to subsidize that, for now, do not bring the expected benefits. Therefore, the key positive recommendation, the Government of Zapatero encouraged to “think about how to transform them into work.”

Seems claro enough, rough edges of idiom-to-idiom notwithstanding. Also reporting this statement (I’m told) were, inter alia, Europa Press and El Economista.

Yet somehow the subsequently posted transcript reflects something far less politically embarassing than the widely reported admission. Not that Clinton’s is the final word on this — whatever it is he said — because, as I noted, Calzada’s team performed research while his critics have largely shouted opinions.

Friends have sought the actual recording so as to put this to rest, so far with no success.