All the Answers
Well-known member
Deputies gave half-sanction to a new retirement mobility formula, but President Milei anticipated that he would veto it - Infobae
Source:
Diputados dio media sanción a una nueva fórmula de movilidad jubilatoria, pero el presidente Milei anticipó que la vetará
La actualización será en base a la inflación y se incluirá una recomposición extra del 8,1%. El Fondo de Garantía de Sustentabilidad fue el punto que generó mayor conflicto
www.infobae.com
The update will be based on inflation and will include an extra recomposition of 8.1%. The Sustainability Guarantee Fund was the point that generated the greatest conflict
By Federico Millenaar
Debate on retirement mobility in the Chamber of Deputies
The dialogue opposition blocks and Peronism reached a political agreement that allowed them to advance with the half-sanction in Deputies of a new formula for updating pensions that replaces the mechanism that Javier Milei imposed by decree.
The agreed text, which was approved with 162 votes in favor and 72 against , proposes a monthly update based on the latest data available from the Consumer Price Index (CPI). In addition, an extra compensation - or "splice" - will be included with 8.1% , given that the Government granted 12.5% that does not cover the 20.6% inflation of January (the month that is left out of the update ).
The minimum amount will guarantee coverage of the basic basket for the elderly (which would be around $260,000) . However, to prevent the updating of the basic basket - which takes place after the payment of salaries - from leaving the increases out of date, it was decided to set a minimum equivalent to 1.09 of the basic basket.
In turn, the opposition annually included an additional 50% of the variation between the RIPTE (average wages) and the CPI to enable the possibility of improving retirements in contexts of economic growth. Thus the CPI will not become a ceiling for assets.
The opposition spaces came to the session with several opinions. The most important revolved around the role of the Sustainability Guarantee Fund (FGS) of the ANSES, since the dialogueists wanted it to be used to pay pension judgments with a final judgment and the Nation's debts with the provincial funds not transferred , while that Peronism remained firm that it could not be used for those purposes.
“ The liquidation of the FGS is a step for the return of the AFJP , which leaves a third of the population discarded. “These are the red lines that we are not willing to cross,” said UxP deputy Itai Hagman forcefully at the beginning of the debate. When asked by Infobae, the bloc explained that the reason for their intransigence on this point is based on the fact that any modification of the FGS would be "opening the door for Milei to later make other changes, in a very complicated economic context."
The difficulty in agreeing on a common opinion between the majority blocks threatened to bring down all the projects. Firstly, the Kirchnerism project would be put to a vote (it was the one that had the most forms in commission), which without the support of the UCR, We Make the Federal Coalition, the Civic Coalition and the Federal Innovation would be rejected. Then he would go on to analyze the project of radicalism, which would suffer the same fate if Peronism decided to pay it in the same coin. In that case, the libertarians would have won an unexpected victory by frustrating the opposition's intentions.
“ We couldn't leave here without giving a signal to the retirees , it would have been crazy because we would also have to wait the entire parliamentary year to discuss the issue again,” said a deputy from the We Make Federal Coalition when asked by this media.
After 5 p.m., the first versions of a political agreement between the dialogueists and Peronism began to circulate. “ It seems that we found a diagonal ,” revealed a deputy who had participated in the rewriting of some of the articles of the radical ruling. Thus, Peronism agreed to withdraw its majority opinion and then vote in favor of the new text.
Rodrigo de Loredo, president of the UCR block (Adrián Escándar)
The exchange pledge was to prioritize the payment of salary readjustment lawsuits and debts with the provincial pension funds with ANSES funds but without touching the FGS . They will be paid with taxes that have a specific allocation for ANSES, such as the Check tax, the PAIS tax and VAT.
“What we are giving is a guarantee or a requirement for the payment to be made effective. It is affected as a priority,” they detailed from the radical bench.
At the time of the vote in particular, article 11 of the ruling, which eliminated the privileged retirements of the Presidents and Vice Presidents, was rejected (111 votes against, 109 in favor) .
Criticism of Pettovello and complaints from universities and FONID
At the beginning of the session, the Left Front deputy asked to vote on the questioning of the Minister of Human Capital Sandra Pettovello over the scandal of food distribution for vulnerable sectors. In addition to the rejection of the LLA and PRO bloc, part of the radicalism and We Make the Federal Coalition abstained or voted against. The motion only obtained 120 affirmative votes and more than 90 rejections.Then, Peronism put to a vote the expansion of the agenda to include the discussion of the restitution of the National Teacher Incentive Fund (FONID) . Since these are projects that were not on the agenda, the support of three-quarters of those present was needed. That special majority was virtually impossible to achieve because radicalism had already announced that it did not agree with discussing that issue today. However, the roll call vote requested by the Unión por la Patria Blanca Osuna deputy obtained 122 affirmative votes and 110 against.
Along the same lines, UxP deputy Pablo Carro requested that projects with an opinion on university financing be added to the agenda . But the special majority of three-quarters of those present was not reached either.
However, during the same session a new request for a special session from the radical bloc to discuss the financing of universities and the restitution of the FONID on July 3 emerged. “The ideal would be for the fiscal package to be approved first, so that the provinces already have the income from the Income Tax restored. And then the specific funds will be discussed,” they clarified to Infobae from the bench led by Rodrigo de Loredo.
Germán Martínez, head of the Union for the Homeland bloc (Franco Fafasuli)
The Government's warning
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the fiscal cost of the approved project would be around 0.43% of GDP. The opposition assured time and again that it was a “reasonable” cost that does not put at risk the fiscal surplus that the Government maintains as its main macroeconomic objective.
Freedom Advances - Retirement mobility
“ The 0.4% expense is something that could easily be exchanged for the tax expense of the special regime of Tierra del Fuego ,” said the radical Rodrigo de Loredo in his closing speech.
However, in the Casa Rosada they interpreted that in Congress “ an agreement was reached between radicalism and Peronism to break the fiscal surplus .” The head of the PRO bench, Cristian Ritondo, also expressed himself along these lines: “We intended not to lend ourselves to the show that radicalism and its new partners from Kirchnerism wanted to put on in this venue. Some entered with the Boca shirt and at halftime they put on the River one. “Some entered (Congress) for the change but later they forgot about the change.” And he attacked: “ Tell me who you vote for and I will tell you who you are .”
It was Milei himself who already announced that he doesn't give a damn if he has to cancel the projects promoted by the opposition and assured that he will defend the fund "with a pure veto" , if necessary.
Along the same lines, yesterday the new Chief of Staff, Guillermo Francos, repeated that there are no funds to grant greater increases to retirees. “When one expresses the will to grant a benefit, one would have to say very clearly where the funds come from. The Government has expressed with the same clarity that it does not have available resources,” he noted and once again warned about the possibility of a presidential veto.
