[ad_1]
The upcoming elections are forcing politicians to resort to ingenuity to get the attention of voters, and in 15 minutes they are checking the scope of truth in political advertisements and election speeches. If you notice political announcements or statements by politicians that raise doubts about the veracity of the facts, we invite you to send them by email [email protected] or complete the form after this news.
On Monday, on the “LRT Forum” program, there was a debate on flat-rate payments to pensioners. Here, Paluck claimed that the Social Democrats took the position that benefits should have been differentiated, but they were not.
“Therefore, we abstained from voting on this decision,” Paluck said.
But have the Social Democrats really abstained? 15 minutes decided to check it out.
The Seimas approved the Single Payment Law for Beneficiaries of Social Security Pensions and Social Assistance Benefits, according to which 200 euros were paid to all pensioners in the country in August.
Then 88 members of the Seimas voted in favor of the law, 8 against and 6 deputies abstained.
The votes of the representatives of the Lithuanian Social Democratic Party were distributed as follows:
Linas Balsys voted in favor of the law, Algirdas Sysas voted against and Rasa Budbergytė abstained. Three other Social Democrats, Algimantas Salamakinas, Dovilė Šakalienė and Liudas Jonaitis, registered to vote but did not vote. D.Šakalienė explained that she did, because by voting on the law, she would decide and on the benefit that she would receive herself due to her disability.
During the voting of the Social Democrats Julius Sabatauskas, Bronius Bradauskas and Raminta Popovienė, there were no members of the Seimas.
So on what basis does G. Paluckas say that the Social Democrats abstained from voting for the benefit if only R.Budbergytė did?
The president of the LSDP admits that he has taken interpretations in his speech.
“It just came to our attention then. After discussions in the group, members were recommended to abstain or not vote in favor of said draft. It is true that the two had a different opinion. One against (that is, of the same dissident side), well, and the other in favor. Democracy. However, the relationship between those who did not support and those who supported did not allow us to say that we do not support the project “, – why did the representatives of the LSDP abstained from voting on pensioner benefits, 15 minutes explained G. Paluckas.
It is true that G. Paluckas is right because the LSDP representatives tried to establish differentiated benefits. It was suggested that pensioners with incomes above 375 euros would not receive benefits, but the Seimas did not approve it.
According to the 15-minute assessment, G. Paluckas is wrong in saying that the representatives of the LSDP abstained from voting on the decision to distribute equal benefits of 200 euros to all pensioners. When the law was passed, one Social Democrat voted in favor, one against, and one abstained. The majority of the LSDP representatives did not vote at all.
[ad_2]
