The president of the Chamber of Deputies, Martin Menemresponded to Kirchnerism for the claim of alleged irregularities and inconsistencies in the text of the Base Law which was sent to the Senate.
“We thank Representative Martínez for reviewing the text of the Law of Bases and having detected simple involuntary typing errors in the transcription of the communication of the law,†he expressed through social networks.
Read also: Senate: with strong criticism of Kirchnerism, officials defend the Bases Law and the fiscal package in committee
And he added: “Evidently his experience in parliamentary practice and the amount of errata made on this type of errors during the previous administration, shows that they are problems that can generally arise in laws of this size and importance. . What is NOT coincidental is the attitude of Unión por la Patria in the face of another legislative defeat.
In an extensive message, Menem crossed the opposition for trying to hinder the debate in the plenary session of the commissions that takes place this Tuesday: «Surely for that sector that always imposed its laws, turning Congress almost into a notary of the Executive and without articulating consensus or listening to the rest of the political sectors of the Chamber, The approval of this House of the Base Law must have meant a hard blow to its leadership and for its way of facing the legislative agenda, more aimed at preventing than recognizing the new political reality of Argentina.â€
“This, perhaps, does not mean a triumph of Freedom Advances in itself, but rather shows the failure of a way of doing politicsto which 56 percent of Argentines said no a few months ago,†he noted.
Likewise, he pointed out: “Nor is it surprising the constant attitude of wanting to muddy the field so as not to play the game in the field of debate of ideas†.
There, the head of Deputies listed the K maneuvers to hinder the treatment of the project: «Citing special sessions on dates of impossible compliance and then saying that there is a «criminal crime» in not carrying it out; suddenly recovering memory and attachment to constitutionalism or, as in this last case, overreacting on the fact of having detected minimal minor transcription errors of a law, that do not alter their spirit in any way and that are common in this type of extensive regulations.
«To pretend that it is malicious that where it said ‘authorization’ it says ‘permission’ when the law in the entire article involved uses such terms on several occasions, interchangeably and as synonyms to refer to what himself, and That, due to human error in transcription, attempts are made to render communication null and void, it sounds like desperation.â€he remarked.
Read also: The Government crossed the unionists who threatened to blackmail the senators who support the Bases Law: «We are not going to give in to extortion.»
The complaint was made this morning by the head of the Unión por la Patria block in Deputies, Germán Martínez, that he claimed to leave “no effect†the turn of the initiative to the Upper House for presenting “differences†with the text that obtained a half sanction.
The legislator stated: “The text that was communicated to the Senate has differences with what the deputies voted in the chamber. That can’t happen. And it is a reason for nullity, in your account x.
The keys to the denunciation of Kirchnerism due to the text of the Bases Law that reached the Senate
The block of Deputies of Union for the Homeland (UxP) requested the annulment of the Bases Law project that began to be discussed in the Senate.
- The complaint, filed by the block head, claimed to leave “no effect†the turn of the initiative to the Upper House for presenting “differences†with the text that obtained half a sanction in Deputies.
- Martínez attached the document with the formal request presented to the president of the Lower House, Martín Menem: “In the communication the text has been modified put up for consideration in the plenary and approved, getting upset in this way the will of the legislator and exceeding the authorization granted by the body to make corrections.”
- The head of the UxP block in the Lower House explained that in a «non-exhaustive» analysis, «some of these alterations» were detected and that the maneuver involves the “non-compliance of his duty as a public official. He cited as an example that in article 152, in the last paragraph, changed the term “export authorization†with that of “export permit†.
- Another of the examples cited is the adulteration of article 171, “where the agenda says ‘that the PEN can establish different minimum amounts by ‘productive sector or subsector’ or by ‘productive stage’, the communication says ‘productive sector’. In relation to the amount, while the OD states that the PEN can establish different minimum amounts equal to or greater than USD 200,000,000, the communication says greater.†.