[ad_1]
Six days after Congress, after marathon days, passed the bill of law into law. Budget 2021, the Government entered this Friday a Request before the Constitutional Court (TC) to declare unconstitutional nine changes approved by parliamentarians and that, among other provisions, involve delivery of bonds, grace pensions and care for victims of domestic violence.
The first contested gloss refers to the reduction of some investment budgets of regional governments, via a cut in the National Fund for Regional Development (FNDR), since what was approved requires that the regional government approve with two thirds of its council the reassignments proposed by the Government.
A second theme relates to Junaeb’s gloss on a voucher for food handlers in extreme areas.
In addition, the Executive questions a change to the item of the Public Treasury related to the way of executing the resources for grace pensions paid to former state coal mining workers.
He also challenged a gloss that corresponds to the regional governments and establishes that it will not be required to request the qualification certificate of the housing project, issued by the respective Serviu, to authorize resources for the purchase of land for housing use.
Similarly, he appealed to the CT for the curriculum inclusion voucher for Chiloé in the Undersecretariat of Education, which seeks to include content that strengthens the traditions of the southern archipelago.
Other items brought before the court refer to details on the junk tenders, a gloss from the Ministry of Housing that modifies from 5 to 15 percent the amount that the Serviu may allocate from the Housing Choice Solidarity Fund, the replacement item of vacancies in the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights and the section of program on care for victims of domestic violence, in the Ministry of Women and Gender Equity, which seeks to incorporate into said policy women who have been subjected to domestic or gender violence during the pandemic.
“A STEP BACK IN THE ACHIEVEMENT”: OPPOSING CRITICS
From the opposition, the deputy Gabriel Ascencio (DC) rejected the challenge to the gloss related to curricular inclusion in Chiloé: “This is a fully admissible budget gloss, it is optional and democratically approved by large majorities in the House and Senate. Appealing to the Constitutional Court against Chiloe culture and history is a nonsense for Piñera, “he tweeted.
Piñera goes to the Constitutional Court to prevent the history and culture of Chiloé from being included in the school curricula of the island’s establishments.
[Hilo 1/5] pic.twitter.com/8EGmOBVLZP– Gabriel Ascencio (@G_Ascencio) December 4, 2020
For his part, the senator Jorge Pizarro (DC) stated that the challenge involves a “step back from the government in what has been achieved.”
# Budget2021 @sebastianpinera resort to CT. Now to challenge parliamentary glosses that allow CORES to enter the budget debate; prioritize better Housing Solidarity Fund or attend VIF victims during the pandemic.
One step back from @Government of Chile in what has been achieved. pic.twitter.com/LEhzkRhyg7– Jorge Pizarro Soto (@pizarrosenador) December 4, 2020
[ad_2]
