Far from the consensus with which the recommendations of the Toledo Pact were approved – and in which the Minister of Social Security, José Luis Escrivá, has repeatedly relied on to defend his reform of the pension system – the parliamentary commission has been the scene today from a cascade of unanimous criticism from all the opposition to the signed agreement. A text from which all the groups have distanced themselves and to which they have denied their support.
The PP parliamentary spokesperson, Cuca Gamarra, has taken the floor before the minister to spoil the reform in parts proposed by the Government, which turns the signed agreement into “a sweetened trailer of what is to come”, and has recalled how the Escrivá himself, “in a real attack”, acknowledged that the ‘baby boomers’ will have to choose between working more or assuming adjustments in their pension. Gamarra has called the repeal of the “successful” reform of 2013 a mistake, which the minister criticized in the turn of reply, who, visibly annoyed, has snapped “that the 2013 reform implied a loss of purchasing power of the 40% ».
Also the deputy of Vox Pablo Sáez has charged against the “lack of credibility” of the Government and has pointed out that the cuts are yet to come. Theory to which Ciudadanos has joined, which has shown its concern about two specific issues of the agreement: a link between pensions and the CPI that “borders on irresponsible” and the lack of measures that guarantee sustainability in the long term, according to María Muñoz.
Nor have the government’s parliamentary partners shown their support for Escrivá. And even United We Can has issued serious warnings. Deputy Aina Vidal has assured that the agreement “is fine, but it is not enough” and has set the stage for the negotiation of the new intergenerational equity mechanism. “We will be at your side to provide guarantees and pay decent pensions, but we are not diverted. “We are not going to accept cuts or strange formulas,” he said after criticizing his statements about the ‘baby boomers’. “A strange way to explain an agreement to focus on something that is not part of it,” he said. “Those of us who have certain responsibilities cannot afford to have bad days,” he said, referring to the minister’s rectification.
Nor has the nationalist bloc shown its support. “This broad brush reform that hides a covert cut is not worth us,” said Jordi Salvador of ERC, a group that has assured “it will not be an accomplice” of it. The PNV, for its part, has made it clear that the Government may have problems to carry out the Budgets if they do not negotiate with them the pending issues regarding Social Security and has acknowledged being “very critical” of the proposed agreement. “Although we are partners we have to find out from the press the contents of the agreement,” he said, demanding a change of attitude from the minister.
Oskar Matute, EH-Bildu deputy, has ironized with the minister’s words in which he assured that society’s pessimism with pensions does not correspond to reality. “Do not pensioners see how the pension money box has been emptied for things that have nothing to do with pensions and confirm that they have to work more and for longer?”, He said. “There are things that are good but we believe that there are negative aspects that we do not like and that we are not going to support” and has advanced mobilizations in the streets to reverse some of the measures.
For his part, PDeCat, Genís Boadella, has criticized that the reform is based on “patches” and has called for a global solution. A criticism that was also launched by the deputy of the Canary Coalition, Ana Oramas, who has been very harsh both with the substance of the agreement and with the forms: «They approve the Draft without the conflicting elements and postpone them to November, aren’t they thinking of bringing them as an amendment to the procedure? “, has said. The minister has later criticized Oramas and accused him of making an “inconsistent” speech and being in the “political dribble”.
The CUP has also denounced Escrivá’s “cuts” because, according to its deputy, Albert Botran, “the basic approach is already false, since we are told that in the future there will be a lack of contributors to the demographic pyramid, but there is no demographic problem, but of unemployment and low wages ”, has settled.