After a large group of deputiesmost of them opponents, withdraw the call for a special session that was requested to deal with the projects that propose a restructuring of the contracts of UVA credits as a result of accumulated debts, The lower house resumed the debate in committees and took a further step in the search for minimum consensus to rule.
In a joint plenary session of the Finance and Budget and Treasury committees, It was agreed that the advisory teams of the authors of the 11 projects should now work on unifying criteria to try to synthesize the different proposals.
The national deputy Julio Cobos (UCR), who led the request for a special session along with 40 other legislators from the UCR, the PRO, the Socialist Party and even the Frente de Todos, He had tried to speed up the vote, but the truth is that the agreements had not been threaded, not even to enable a quorum in the venue, since both in the ruling party and in Together for Change, doubts persist about a rescue plan for debtors GRAPE.
However, the pressure maneuver helped him to reactivate the work of the commissions that had slowed down the treatment since September of last year (another meeting was held in November but only for Finance).
The reality is that the session that had been called was doomed to failure, since if it miraculously passed the quorum filter, then the project would have to achieve the improbable sum of two thirds of the votes present, given that it would have reached the venue without an opinion. . The most logical path is through discussion in committees.
Projects
Opening the meeting, the president of the Finance Committee, Alice Aparicio (Frente de Todos) recalled that last year three informative meetings were held in which UVA debtors took part who reported “the great anguish” they live with their families for not being able to meet the credit quotas, which rose exponentially as a result of inflation.
For his part, Cobos pointed out that his project, which proposes to apply the UVI update index (linked to the value of the construction), “contemplates a solution principle for those who have credit today, but also for the future, because the truth is is that today there is no mortgage credit in Argentina”.
The man from Mendoza explained that “75,000 loans were granted in 2017, 80,000 in 2018, only 9,000 in 2019, and 20,000 in 2020.”}
recognized that “There is no delinquency because the last thing people stop paying is their home”, but he recalled that “there were five freezes and the last one a convergence”, which is why since “the middle of last year (the UVA credit takers) They are paying the quota in all its magnitude”.
The radical explained that the structural problem that is behind the difficulties to face the high quotas lies in inflation, and stressed that “until September 2018 the evolution of wages was above” above the rise in prices, so it is not It represented such a serious matter.
Regarding the different alternatives for changing the mortgage loan update index, which range from the Salary Variation Coefficient, the RIPTE or the UVI, he was confident that finally “everyone would agree” on a criterion only.
“There are projects that speak of a compensating fund, others do not. Another point to discuss is the cut-off date (for the update),” Cobos pointed out, adding that there is consensus on the measure to suspend evictions and foreclosures.
Continuity
Contrary to the man from Mendoza, the deputy of Evolución Radical martin tetaz He defended the continuation of the UVA mechanism, of which he assured that “it works very well and we have to take care of it.”
For the economist, “there is no need to break contracts” or “establish regulations that end up like the Rental Law”, of which he said that it was sanctioned due to the “good will” of the legislators, but “it ended up generating more problems than solutions”.
Tetaz affirmed that “all the issues that are attributable to UVA are not because of UVA, but because of inflation and the fall in wages”, and in that sitting he argued that “the real fall in wages affected the entire economy and has nothing to do with the UVAs”.
“If we break the mechanism, we start to change rates or conditions, or we change the contracts, we are going to generate a lot of damage.
That is why I do not agree with the readjustment of the credits before, it would be a violation of the contracts that we are not going to accompany. What I don’t like either and generates a lot of noise is the figure of a compensation fund, “he considered.
On behalf of the Frente de Todos, Juan Manuel Pedrini indicated that the UVA price as of June 30, 2017 was 19.33 pesos and today it is at 214.25 pesos, an increase of 1,108%, which he described as “insane”.
The man from Chaco recognized that “those who took out mortgage loans have assets that are priced in dollars,” thereby minimizing the damage, but in the case of those who took out loans to buy a car, for example, “today they have a unpayable debt and the car is worth 30-40% of what it was worth at the time, so the situation is much worse.”
Source: Ambito
