The plenary session of the Senate in which it was expected to discuss the alternative and official presentations of The pension reform ended in controversy. The president of the Senate, Iván Name, adjourned the session in protest at “inappropriate treatment” that Congress has received from President Gustavo Petro after the collapse of the health reform last week.
The plenary session, which began after 4 in the afternoon, although it was scheduled for 2, began with an intervention by Name in which he informed who would be the members of the subcommittee that will report to the plenary on whether health reform must be revivedregarding an appeal filed by the Historical Pact after the project was archived in Commission VII with 9 of 14 votes.
Later, Name read a letter he sent to President Petro last week after the head of state indicated that The decision of the legislative cell to archive the project was determined by the Spanish company Keralty, owner of the EPS Sanita, today intervened by the Superintendence of Health.
“It forces me to respond to its audacity. And that's why I read, so as not to start a debate,” Name commented.
In the text, which was released the previous week, President Name assured that the “insulting and slanderous statements by the President attack the dignity held by all members of this legislative cell.”
Later, when he finished reading his letter, he reported on the adjournment of the session: “Our dissatisfaction with this inadequate treatment. As a sign of protest, I adjourn the session and reschedule for next Monday,” Name said to the plenary.
(Read more: Risks and challenges of the pension reform being discussed in Congress)
The decision caused controversy. Senator Miguel Uribe, for example, celebrated the determination of the president of the Senate: “He celebrated President Name's decision to have adjourned the session, which was initially called to discuss the pension reform, as an act of rejection and protest against the false and slanderous accusations by Gustavo Petro to the Congress of the Republic. “We cannot allow Gustavo Petro to exceed his duties, to slander the congressmen and to violate the independence of powers. It is time for Gustavo Petro to learn his lesson.”
But the government's allies harshly questioned the measure. “President Iván Name has made a decision that took us all by surprise (…). Beyond the discussions that there may be with President Petro, we have to look for agreements. Senator Iván Name also has to understand what he is talking about on behalf of some of those who voted for him, but he does not speak on behalf of many of us who are here.”said Senator Inti Asprilla, of the Green Alliance, who initially appealed the adjournment of the plenary session, but pointed out that in order to seek agreements he withdrew his request.
(Read more: Court toughened requirements for transferring private funds to Colpensiones: what changed)
What does it mean for pension reform?
Although the initiative is still alive and the Government is beginning to consolidate majorities – the Liberal Party opened the doors for consultation – for the approval of its presentation for the second debate, Name's decision is undoubtedly a setback for the project .
Because? In addition to the challenge of consolidating support, time is a factor against the Government. If the reform is not approved before June 20, it will fail due to lack of procedures and must still go through three debates: one in the plenary session of the Senate and two in the House of Representatives.
(Read more: Another pension reform is possible and necessary)
TIME – POLITICS
