“For those who are reflecting on higher education tomorrow, I leave you some information. The salary increase in the general public administration in the year until October reached 68.2%, that of university teachers was 81.4%”, said Federico Sturzenegger through your X account. “It is urgent to prioritize education over political confrontations,” posted the Ministry of Human Capital.
These messages reflect the prevailing thinking in the Government that “The university march is political.” To reaffirm this concept, they argue that “some unions did not accept the salary increase, which was the same amount they requested” and regarding financing, they insist that “expenses were increased by 270%.”
The organizers of the march raise the demand for budgetary allocations to cover operating, research and extension expenses of the universities. These demands include a salary recomposition for teaching and non-teaching staff, which has accumulated losses of 50% since last December, according to union estimates.
The Government, for its part and through various writings, states that Universities manage resources poorly and are also not very transparent when reporting expenses.
As happened with the university march in April, in the corridors of the Casa Rosada they estimate that This Wednesday’s demonstration will be important. They believe that the real cause is to go against the Government, relying on the “supposed defense of a white elephant such as the Public University.”
A senior source close to the president Javier Milei He insisted that the demonstration is against the Government: “that the Moyano de la vida and Cristina are supporting it shows that there is intention to harm.” Those around the president criticize the active role of Martin Lousteau In favor of the march and with cynicism, they affirm: “It’s the only thing left to do.”
Regarding financing for Universities, in the Casa Rosada they insist that they have no problem with Congress increasing it “as long as it is justified where the funds will come from,” issue that is not contemplated, according to the Executive, in the approved Law. They argue that: “Our problem is with irresponsible politicians.”
The veto of the university financing law
Regarding the veto, the decision has already been made for a long time and “will leave after the march” they say, coinciding with the established time (10 days) to reject a Law.
The Government does not rule out that they will have problems making the veto firm. The head of the Chamber of Deputies, Martin Menemworks to gather wills, but already, several PRO legislators were reticent.
“If they do not support, the veto will not come out, but it would be an act of political meanness,” they maintain in the Casa Rosada. Furthermore, they consider that “it would look like the PRO is putting the surplus in check,” they explain.
In the event that the Law remains firm, the Executive indicates that the item to cover university financing “it will have to come from somewhere” That is to say, other expenses would be cut, such as, for example, public works, although it is not ruled out that “if they reject the veto, it could be judicialized.”
Source: Ambito
