translated from Spanish: House Economics Commission rejects Piñera’s veto to project banning the cutting of basic services

The Economics Committee of the Chamber of Deputies decided to reject the veto entered by President Sebastián Piñera to the project that prohibits the cutting of basic services in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic.
First, by 7 votes to 6, the parliamentary body declared the veto admissible, with the decisive vote of the independent Pedro Velasquez. However, in ruling on the content, with 6 votes in favour, 6 against and 1 abstention (from UDI Joaquín Lavín León), the committee dismissed it.
The presidential veto now passes to the Chamber, although it can be noted that the Commission’s decision is not binding but a recommendation.
The Executive’s decision to veto the project outraged the opposition and surprised even Chilean parliamentarians Vamos who were awaiting the enactment of the initiative, dispatched more than a month ago by Congress.
However, according to the Executive, the veto does not introduce changes in terms of cuts and suspension of payments, because this is already covered by the agreement with the companies. The problem is that “spending the collection of accounts legally is complex because there is a risk that companies will claim that there is a public charge established by law and limitations on property rights, which could result in legal action seeking compensation from the State,” the Segpres argues.
Fundamentally, the project eliminates the telecommunications sector considerations that were in the congressional-released rule, arguing that the industry is already delivering the free connectivity plan to the most vulnerable sectors as required by law.
In addition, the precise treatment of drinking water which those who comply with the standard may only defer the payment of drinking water consumption up to 15 cubic metres. Although, households proving to have more than four members may defer payment of up to four additional cubic metres per person.
In addition, it suggests removing the article from the project that companies are prohibited from recovering the costs caused by the implementation of the initiative through price transfer or in tariff processes, adding that “costs will not be incorporated by companies or less by the respective regulators in future tariff processes”.
Joanna Pérez Mps
The pusher of the “Anticortes” bill, D.C. Deputy Joanna Pérez was infugating to declare that “say things as they are, here, the government is only seeking to defend the interests of big companies”.
He added: “We value the rejection of the veto, but I think it may have been declared inadmissible, because it definitely departs from the matrix idea because higher expenses would be passed for people, by passing costs, and that is precisely the opposite of what this law seeks. This draft was presented on 18 March and the Government has failed to understand. Let us not see the luck in this committee, today this project is not only inadmissible, so we regret that it has not been declared that way, but it has been rejected.”
“The veto suppresses items by harming people, passing costs and also eliminating an essential article that benefited families, a solidarity connectivity plan where Minister Hutt worked with us,” she said.
Finally, Ms Pérez stated that “I do not know what agreements the government is working with companies, but this demand must be settled by law, with transparency, towards citizenship”.

Original source in Spanish