The senator for the Atacama region, former Minister of Education and former presidential candidate of the fleeting electoral pact Constituent Unity, Yasna Provoste, comes to the step of the internal crisis facing the party in which she militates since she is a teenager: the Christian Democracy (DC), and of which she is part of the board of directors chaired by Felipe Delpin. Championed by the Apruebo, she believes that the road to a new Constitution is the most important challenge facing our country, and that it must unite the political wills of the different parties, ruling out the possibility of a “friendly dissolution” of the collectivity, as proposed a few weeks ago by the Also Falangist Senator, Francisco Huenchumilla.
In addition, the parliamentarian referred to the dissident voices of some militants of the DC, who contravening the institutional position of the party, demonstrated, first requesting “freedom of action” in the face of the Plebiscite of September 4, and then have evidenced their position in favor of the Rejection. Among this group are former President Eduardo Frei, Senators Ximena Rincón and Matías Walker, as well as other historical faces of the phalanx, such as Belisario Velasco and Ricardo Hormazábal. A situation of internal division that increased after the national junta decided, in a majority way, to lean towards the Apruebo, exposing conflicts that could hinder a harmonious collective mood in the face of the coming political challenges.
In that sense, Provoste ruled out that the decision to join the Approve option is an attempt by the current board of directors of the DC to build bridges to the Government, considering that the phalanx offers something that could be attractive to the Executive: political experience and experience in the action of governing, both in the former Concertación and in the former New Majority. In this regard, the former presidential candidate said that she is not thinking about the hypothetical possibility of assuming any ministry, in case President Gabriel Boric so requires, since she assures that she only concentrates on fulfilling her task as a senator. However, his name has appeared as one of the cards for an eventual change of cabinet, especially in portfolios such as the General Secretariat of the Presidency and the Ministry of the Interior and Public Security, where his ministers, Giorgio Jackson and Izkia Siches, appear strongly questioned, after a string of unforced errors.
-What do you think have been the main errors – political and communicational – of the Government, in this first stage of management? How do you think a party like DC could contribute in that regard?
-Today the DC is collaborating with the most important task facing our country, which is to make every effort so that in the Plebiscite of September 4, we have an important triumph for the Approve. And I would hope that the Government understands that, because on the one hand we hear the President of the Republic who says not to deviate from the central and that we have to be able to see everything that unites us, and the next day his ministers do the opposite. We saw it when on 7 April the President announced the freezing of public transport fares, and then the Minister of Transport did the opposite; or when the President says that we are going to support families in the face of the inflationary crisis, and his Minister of Energy proposes the opposite; or recently, when the President says we must move toward a unity discourse, and Minister Jackson comes out to disqualify his allies.
-In that sense, would leaning towards the Approve be a sign in search of rapprochement with the Government? What do you say about those who believe it is a “desperate” decision that seeks to avoid the political insignificance of the DC?
The decision made by the DC only does so with the country in mind. The Government is currently in the minority, and it needs the support of many in order to offer governance, and President Boric knows this. But I hope that your political team understands this too, and in any case we are guided by our analysis of reality and by the defense of our proposals, and very sincerely, we do not need to enter the Government to remain consistent with our approaches. The relevance of the DC has nothing to do with being close, inside or outside the Government, because we are an intransigible opposition that has always been willing to collaborate, in building a majority for the changes that the country demands.
Today, what we also hope is that the Government will be able to regain the sense of urgency to govern and to act accordingly. And more than entering the Government, what the DC is interested in is that we enter a logic of facing the great problems that today affect citizens: the rise in the cost of living, the repeated increases in the price of fuel, and the insecurity that affects people day by day. After the Plebiscite, many important agreements will be required, and the DC has an indispensable role to play for Chile to do well, and that is our purpose.
What would you respond to a call from President Boric to join the cabinet? Have you considered that option?
-I am a senator for the Atacama region until 2026, which is the date of dissolution of the Senate, in case of winning the Approval. I must say clearly that I never have my eyes on anything else, where the first thing we have to be able to do is win this September 4th. When I was a congresswoman, I wasn’t thinking that I was going to be a candidate for the Senate, and when I entered the DC – as a teenager – I didn’t think I was going to become a senator of the Republic. So, it’s not something that’s part of my concerns, to be doing one thing and looking at another. Today we have only one purpose, which is to do things right to win this September 4 with the Approve.
Do you think that this decision around the Plebiscite sharpens the internal division in the party? What could influence the DC in an institutional way to lean towards the Approve?
-I think that the DC is not divided, but is decided by the Approval. We have dissenting voices, but we have democratically resolved our institutional option, and those who lost know it, and it is not surprising the situation in which we find ourselves, because we are in politics not to remain silent, but to take positions in favor of the great majorities. We are very aware of the role we have to play, and we could not play to be neutral or decree freedom of action, which was favorable to Rejection. And the proof of this is that all those who, before the meeting, called for freedom of action, have demonstrated against the Approval, so we are a voice that was wanted to be heard at the moment when the country has to make a historic decision. The right is for the Rejection, the left for the Approve, but neither option wins clearly, and the DC wants to be a relevant actor, which helps to tip the balance for the benefit of a better democracy.
How is it possible to coexist with some militants who have decided to take their own path, contravening the decision of the party? How much does it affect an internal relationship that was already worn out?
DC is not a club. It is a community governed by principles and values, which we want to see present in our country, and it has already taken a position through its highest body, which is the national board and which resulted in 64% of its votes in favor of the Approval of the new Constitution. And that is the institutional position of the DC, because one enters a party respecting the established principles and collective decisions of its highest organs, not for a path of one’s own or a personal decision. And I believe that the most important thing is that we must be contributors to an environment of peace and justice, never forgetting our principles that also include our doctrinal bases, where solidarity and human dignity are at the center, and that is what this new Constitution represents. And that is why perhaps some do not like the decision we have made, but we have to be able to make known that today we are not in politics to keep silent, but to make decisions in favor of the great majority.
-A few weeks ago, Senator Huenchumilla pointed out that the situation in the DC was unsustainable and that only the path of “peaceful dissolution” remained. What can the party do to resolve internal conflicts and try to become a relevant political actor again?
What allows a party to survive and grow is its ability to make decisions, when it costs, but when it is indispensable. In any case, I read very carefully the interview of Senator Francisco Huenchumilla, and what I understood is that this peaceful dissolution was the only thing left if as a party we remained undecided in relation to the Plebiscite of September 4. Fortunately we knew how to do it and we did it on time, and I believe in that resolution, which aims to face the main challenges and deliver answers. And that’s what we’ve done in DC and it’s what allows us to also look to the future with opti.Even from this resolution, at times that were complex and that perhaps for some the easy way was not to take a position. But I think that this party leadership – headed by Felipe Delpin – did not doubt at any time that the DC should take a resolution, at a historic moment. And we are convinced that this new Constitution does good for our country, and that is why we have mostly made the decision to support the Approval.
-Finally, what do you think of the option of approving to reform? Do you think that there should be a political agreement prior to the Plebiscite, on the aspects of the new Constitution that should be modified?
-I think we should not deviate from what is important. Today the process in which we find ourselves is democratically defined, and there are only two alternatives that we are going to face on September 4, which is to approve or reject. And we, this September 4, are not called to pronounce on a Plan B or Plan C, because they are only two alternatives. And it seems to me that everything that keeps us firmly in the Approve campaign is viable, where perfecting is always possible, and if someone would like to know the opinion of the DC on what we can improve from the constitutional proposal, they can see it on our website. But today, the concentration that we have to install in our daily purpose is how we are able to reach each of the territories, and speak with enormous transparency and clarity. This is a text that, although it has some aspects to improve, the vast majority of its contents are of enormous benefit to the majority of Chileans, especially those who have had a situation of postponement for a long time.
Follow us on
: “On September 4th we are not called to a plan B or C. There are only two options. And the DC is determined by the Approval”){kind=link}