[ad_1]
The Government looks closely at what happens in the Chamber of Deputies with the debate and the vote on the second withdrawal of 10% of AFP funds. He does not want to repeat the failure – despite the fact that they did not call it that – which meant the approval of the first withdrawal of 10%, the one that occurred in the middle of the pandemic and was not the debacle that the experts had announced.
On this occasion, the project also has broad support from parliamentarians. In fact, yesterday his idea of legislating was approved in the Constitution commission. But this time, the Government will appeal to the Constitutional Court to prevent the project from advancing, as announced on Tuesday by the Minister of the Segpres, Cristián Monckeberg, who announced that “we understand that this project has a quorum of 3/5, we We consider it to be 2/3 and for the same reason we are going to make a constitutional reservation in this matter. “
For his part, Undersecretary Juan José Ossa said that “I request the secretariat to register the constitutionality reservations regarding all the projects that have been approved in general in the associated minutes, in this history of the law.”
“As long as Chile does not have a new Constitution, the current one must be respected,” Ossa concluded.
Behind this announcement there is concern in La Moneda. In fact, this Wednesday President Sebastián Piñera met in the Palace with the Ministers of Finance, Ignacio Briones, and of Labor, María José Zaldívar to analyze the steps to follow in this matter.
They were joined by Cristián Monckeberg, Minister Secretary General of the Presidency, and the spokesman Jaime Bellolio.
The objective of the meeting is to address the next steps to be followed by the Executive if the initiative for the second retreat reaches the Chamber for discussion.
Upon leaving the instance, Minister Zaldívar explained the Executive’s refusal to this project: “clearly the economic situation we had in June has nothing to do with what we have now. We have to see if this mechanism will actually help people. People with more resources have already taken out everything. There are people who have no balance in their account. “
On the other hand, Minister Briones said that the priority of the Government and the “national” is to improve pensions. Each one of these withdrawals is 20 billion dollars, they are 1/3 of the national budget, let’s put the numbers into perspective. “
“Personal” disqualifications
The debate in the committee, where it was approved by 11 votes in favor, 1 against, was not without controversy between supporters of the new retirement and detractors. The promoter of the initiative, Pamela Jiles (PH) directly summoned Minister Briones: “He has me rotten. He has me flat. I think the level of cruelty, insensitivity, provocation, the pain of people, the level of mockery of the ministers, it really amazes me. “
Briones immediately replied: “There is nothing more unworthy in the conversation than personal disqualifications (…) It seems to me that it is very rich when one has different positions with arguments. But, please, let’s talk with arguments and not with disqualifications, it is what I only ask you. I think that is what keeps the democratic debate alive. “
Jorge Alessandri (UDI), the only deputy who voted against, stated that “I have voted against the withdrawal of 10%, because I believe that it is not the Chileans who have to pay for this crisis, it is the State that has to put your hand in your pocket. We proposed something concrete to the Government: an equivalent bonus, called ‘10% Bonus’, that people can get into their AFPs, see the amount that would correspond to them in this second 10% withdrawal, and that that check, instead of coming out of your own savings, come out of State income (…) you are rewarding those who formally contributed and worried about saving, but you do not take away their resources for their retirement “.
Eduardo Durán, RN deputy who voted in favor, replied: “It is unfortunate that workers have to make use of their own retirement savings, but it is necessary, because the State has not yet arrived in the best way to support them in this product crisis. of the pandemic (…) Families continue to be severely beaten and do not live by good intentions or good intentions;
Change of mind
Some of the authorities who supported the first withdrawal of 10% changed their position, such as the mayor of Las Condes, Joaquín Lavín.
“I was in favor of the first retirement (…) but we know that every time we take something out of our pension funds that goes against our future retirements. Therefore, it is not the solution. Now, I understand the urgency, the urgency of the people, but I would try to find different formulas. I think it is still possible, I would at least try to find a formula so that this would be tied to pension reform, in the sense that if we are getting money, let’s also say how later we are going to add silver to those Because if not, what will happen is that many people will be left without money for their later retirement (…) I would say that, for now, no, “he said.
[ad_2]
