[ad_1]
The Budget 2021 bill entered controversial terrain after the rejection of the Special Mixed Budget Commission by 14 votes to 10, to item 50 of the Public Treasury.
The vote provoked the indignation of the Minister of Finance, Ignacio Briones, who stated this day that, by rejecting this item, it would not be possible to continue discussing the resources for other services or ministries, since the Treasury is in charge of transferring the variable resources to other items, because most ministries do not have their own resources.
“So if the Treasury was rejected and therefore the sources of financing blocked, we do not see how those other items that are to be discussed can be financed,” said the authority, appealing to an argument based on article 67 of the Constitution, paragraph 4 .
After warning that continuing to discuss the Budget project is unconstitutional and suggests stopping the process, later Briones insisted – in a press release – that “in order to move forward we need the opposition to make a necessary and fundamental gesture, which is to reverse the decision that it took to reject the Treasury, because there are the resources we need to be able to have the discussion in each of the games in which we are open to dialogue. They have the say, hopefully we will find a solution. “
“This is an excuse”
The opposition reacted with annoyance. Senator Jorge Pizarro (DC), president of the Finance Commission, regretted that “the Government has put itself in a position of intransigence, demanding little less than the retraction of the rejection of the Public Treasury’s departure” to continue advancing, while his colleague Yasna Provoste considered that “this is an excuse for not creating a space for dialogue with the opposition, which seeks to reverse the budget cuts in sectors that are key to the development of our country.”
Pizarro added that “what the Executive is doing is making an extreme argument, pointing out that this event paralyzes the process. The table does not share that interpretation, neither the legal nor the technical nor the political. Here it is necessary to continue with the analysis of different items and to sanction all expenses. Frankly, the arguments that it could fall into unconstitutionality or that the minister may run the risk of being constitutionally accused, does not correspond or resist further analysis, since those who have voted are the parliamentarians. The Executive has neither art nor part ”.
In his opinion, with the rejection of the Public Treasury’s departure, what was raised by the opposition “is that it is necessary to talk, dialogue and negotiate the priorities that are established in the Budget” and insisted that this is part of the normal process that occurs in legislative discussion. “There is an established procedure and, if there is no capacity for agreement, here the project will have to be brought to direct discussion in the Chamber,” he indicated, ruling out the suspension of the process as suggested by Minister Briones.
Provoste, for its part, also refuted the Government, also pointing to the “opacity and lack of transparency” in the Budget, as even organizations such as the Fiscal Expenditure Observatory have established.
In his opinion, there are no resource problems. “It is not a problem that we have to tighten our belts. We have substantial resources in this 2021 Budget. But the Government does not want to make it transparent on what they are going to spend on and reduces important items, “he said.
For this reason, Provoste concluded by stating that “I want to make a call for the Government to come out of the trench and advance in a dialogue. La Moneda must dialogue for Chilean families ”.
[ad_2]
