Although slowly myI Gustavo Petro’s pension reform project is advancing in its first debate in Congress. Last Thursday, the report of the presentation was approved in Commission VII of the Senate, and today the voting on the articles is expected to begin.
(See: Women will no longer have to contribute 1,300 weeks to retire).
However, There are 19 points that could complicate the voting of the project. This is because there are 11 articles that do not have an agreement, and another eight that only have a partial agreement.
The first article of the paper is one of those that do not have an agreement and it was agreed that it will be submitted to an election.
This defines the purpose of the bill, but for the senators, there is no agreement with the proposal of the text filed by the Governmentgiven that, they argue that some articles of the proposed reform do not guarantee “universality, improve the sustainability of the system in the medium and long term” and the freedom of choice of contributing members is restricted.
Other point without agreement is 3, in which the structure of the system is presented. The reason behind it is on the threshold of the average premium component, the apple of contention of the reform, and which will be put to a vote.
It is worth remembering that the pillar system proposed by the Petro Government contemplates that Colpensiones and the private pension funds will be part of the same model in which all Colombians will contribute, in which all contributions below three minimum wages will go to Colpensiones, and from this amount onwards to private funds.
However, There have been several alerts from different technical studies that ensure that this ceiling is very high, and would entail high fiscal costs for the country. due to the increase in the pension liability that the nation has to assume, since the majority of contributors would be in this segment.
For this same reason too article 12 and 13 came to the debate without agreement, that presents the general characteristics regarding the affiliation and contribution of the system, as well as its benefits.
Neither youamlittle in article 19, the central article in which the conditions of the contributory pillar of the system are determined; 32, which establishes the settlement and the amount of the comprehensive old-age pension in the contributory pillar.
(See: Pension reform: they approve the report of the presentation in the first debate).
Other point of contention is article 33which establishes the financing and payment mechanism for the complementary component of individual savings.
So like articles 76 and 77which respectively consolidated the conditions of the transition regime between the current system (Law 100 of 1993) and the new system that the reform would create, since those people with more than 1,000 weeks of contributions would keep the current conditions, as well as the opportunity to transfer for people who have contributed more than 1,000 weeks between one system and another under current law.
The two other points are in accordance with articles 88which says that “scheduled withdrawals” must be commuted, and 90, which defines the entry into force of the law as of January 1, 2025.
The coordinator of the project, the senator for the Historical Pact Martha Peralta Epieyú, explained in the last session of the commission that, after the work tables of the last weeks between the Government and the speakers of the Congress, an agreement was canceled in 29 points, while 44 of the articles of the paper do not have proposals to be modified and would be voted as they appear in the text.
(See: Pension reform: they approve the report of the presentation in the first debate).
Pension
iStock
In addition to the points on which there is currently no common vision between the Government and the congressmen, another group of articles have so far only been partially accepted, and could also complicate the debate.
Among them is article 4. This defines the principles of the pillar system, but the speakers objected to the “favourability” and “financing” of this.
there is also the article 14, which, like other points, define the characteristics of the system, and among the points that were not agreed upon is the financing of the model.
One of the changes that the paper introduced compared to the original project was a change in the pension age in the solidarity and semi-contributory pillar,
And this is the point disagree with articles 17 and 18, and for which they were not fully accepted. And the possibility of Colombia Mayor becoming the Solidarity Pillar was also left for a vote in point 17.
Another point that has a partial agreement between the speakers is 20, which defines the obligation in the amount of contributions, since there are various proposals. The presentation establishes that those who have a contribution base income of more than four minimum wages must contribute additional points to the mandatory contribution of 16%.
And neither in point 23 of the articles, which establishes the distribution of those 16 contribution points.
The other matters that do not have a partial agreement have to do with the Savings Fund that would be created for Colpensiones, through the article 24 and the sources for the resources of the Pension Solidarity Fund, through the article 26.
The conservative senator, Nadia Blel, sure that “there are serious governance concerns“of article 24 and that suspicions subsist”regarding the destination of Colombian savings“.
likewise Senator Honorio Henríquez (Democratic Center) featured that “it must be realized more clearly in the way in which these trillion-dollar resources are going to be managed.”
(See: The impacts that will fall on women’s contribution weeks).
LAURA LUCIA BECERRA ELEJALDE
Journalist Portfolio
