In a tense and marathon extraordinary session, also cited on Sunday to dispatch the postponement of elections, the Senate Room follows the debate of the government’s project establishing new support for the middle class, such as the Middle Class Bonus and the Solidarity Loan.
The project began to be processed from 10 a.m. and in the general vote, there were 32 votes in favour and 10 abstentions for the initiative that during its passage through the Senate has had a long process that involved changes to the Initiative of the Executive, which advanced in the Finance Committee following an agreement of officialism and opposition.
In particular, the chamber engaged in a discussion on the admissibility of the separate vote on an article, requested by the opposition with respect to an article establishing the delimitation and conditions of the Middle Class Bonus and incompatibilities with other benefits that would in practice generate discounts for individuals, as they warned from the opposition, which was approved by 22 votes in favour , 19 against and 1 abstention.
“I have to make a reservation of constitutionality, because it is the exclusive initiative of the President all those initiatives that irrogue spending,” was the response of the Minister of the Segpres, Juan José Ossa, while his colleagues from Hacienda Rodrigo Cerda and Social Development, Karla Rubilar, asked the opposition to give in, because an “unnecessary delay is being generated that hits families hard”.
Ministers accused a breach of the agreement that “we understood we had in the finance committee,” Minister Cerda said, something that was ruled out by DC Senator Ximena Rincón, president of the specialized instance. “There was no agreement or anything not to insist on this issue, you have to transparent the information to the public,” he said.
“It will still be necessary to move forward in the third retreat”
The debate was marked by criticism from opposition to the under-project. Precisely Senator DC Ximena Rincón, noted that “I tell everyone that we did everything we could, that we will not refuse this help, but without a doubt there are many who will not have, because whoever decides, who is the one who governs, has not considered them.” “We need to respond to everyone, not just some,” the Executive.
From the Government, Minister Rubilar defended the project by noting that “here an effort is made to address the greatest number of concerns and improvements of the project, that effort has generated such a significant increase in what is investment in social protection”.
Meanwhile, the Socialist Party bench decided to abstain from voting, arguing that the government could take other steps to help some of the citizens who have been most affected by the pandemic, as did Democratic Revolution Senator (DR), Juan Ignacio Latorre and Alejandro Navarro.
“We decided abstention as a bench because we want to give a signal, we understand that there is an improvement, but a product of pressure. We’re leaving people out, which we don’t include and could be done,” said Socialist Senator Isabel Allende.
Navarro, for his part, justified his vow to abstain from the project by noting that “SMEs are left out of this government-provided aid, and there is still uncertainty in people as to whether or not they can access any benefit.” “Piñera keeps speculating on bonds, they’re full of fine print,” he said.
Others, such as PpD Senator Guido Girardi, released around warning that aid “remains insufficient” and said he believed that “progress will be needed in the third withdrawal,” alluding to the 10% projects being processed in the House, while its co-religionist Ricardo Lagos Weber raised that “this project certainly increased resources, but Chile has the capacity to borrow a little more , that’s when we have to break the lagy bank, because we have the crisis in maximum gravity.”
Since officialism, they instead closed ranks with the government project. “This project proposes to deliver bonds and loans with tax charge that relieves the pocket of Chileans without compromising their future assets. This is a responsible measure,” Senator UDI Luz Ebensperger said, while her colleague Claudio Alvarado said that “we would undoubtedly like to do much more, but we have a reality that leads us to be responsible. It’s a good project thatand with the contribution of Congress and all political sectors has been improved.”
For his part, Minister Ossa lamented the tone of the questions: “Regretting that a discussion as relevant as this has been reduced to expressions that are not typical of a height-of-view debate, there was talk of putting your finger in your eye, of lies, of vendepomadas,” the secretary of state, who added that “the correct use of language should always be a constant,” he stressed.
