[ad_1]
The ruling party will insist on the indications that this week were rejected by the Constitutional Commission of the Lower House regarding the second withdrawal of 10 percent of the AFPs, betting on a targeting of those who can access the money.
One of the proposals of the sector is to authorize the transfer of funds only to unemployed people or who can prove a reduction of at least 30 percent of their income, preventing it from being universal.
This position is supported by the Organization for Cooperation and Development (OECD), which claims “not to understand the objective of the project” and criticizes a general withdrawal.
“Freedom without fine print”
The Chamber of Deputies and Deputies will vote in the Chamber next Tuesday on the reform that allows the second withdrawal. In the session, 93 votes in favor will be necessary for the initiative to reach the Senate for its second process and the idea, as in the first withdrawal, it has the support of some pro-government parliamentarians.
“I hope that this Tuesday there will be transversal support from all political sectors. The second retreat people need it urgentlyIt is their money and we, the parliamentarians, cannot be saying who can withdraw and who cannot, “argued the deputy RN Jorge Durán.
“We have to give freedom without fine print, with no obstacle for this second withdrawal reach the families that need it most “added the official legislator.
Government maintains rejection
For his part, Government Spokesperson, Jaime Bellolio (UDI), I affirm that the right path is pension reform and not a second retirement. In addition, he called for responsibility.
“For us the key is that we reach an agreement on the pension reform, that is what the Chileans are asking of us. We did it in a part in the Chamber of Deputies, unfortunately some later ignored that agreement, “said the spokesman.
In addition, he indicated that it is “the moment the opposition stops thinking about itself, stop thinking that they themselves gained a tiny space of power and rather think of the Chileans. “
“If we want to have a pension system in the future that really delivers good pensions, that is incompatible with having four million people with zero weight in their funds. Therefore, we call on us to have that responsibility, “said the Secretary of State.
Deputy PS does not close to indications
The deputy PS Marcos Ilabaca, member of the Constitution CommissionHe assured to agree with these points, but insisted that the responsibility lies with the Executive.
“The reality of our country is that the majority of Chileans do not have enough income to survive. So, when you seek to develop public policy, you have to focus it. In this I can share the criteria of the OECD and share some of the criticisms that the Government has let slip, “said the parliamentarian.
Despite this, “the truth is that when this type of public policy is generated, the only one that has legal and constitutional power to develop it is the Executive,” he added.
For his part, his coreligionist Leonardo Soto projected that “there will be two votes: a first for determine the approval quorum of this bill, because the Government has been very insistent in stating that it requires the backing of two thirds of the Chamber. “
“A second vote will be on the merits of the project, and the question is whether it will have sufficient support,” he added, estimating that “now it will have much more support than the one that had the first withdrawal of funds in the middle of this year.
The controversy of the data
Meanwhile, the controversy continues over the data of those who obtained the first 10 percent, which were required by the Minister of Finance, Ignacio Briones. The Director of the Protected Data Foundation, Danny Rayman, assures that this was an illegal overreach.
“There is an excess of the powers that the Ministry of Finance has, since it is not the call to make a detailed analysis of the personal information of the beneficiaries, precisely of social benefit, but rather that corresponds to the Superintendency of Pensions or even, when we speak of income, to the Internal Revenue Service, among others “criticized the expert.
“We express our concern that we see again how the protection of personal data and privacy is not taken into account by our authorities. Therefore, it should be noted that this request for information would be illegal, “Rayman said.
