The House of Representatives approved the Petro Government’s pension reform, amid much criticism, considering that the text that the Senate had approved was accepted.
You may be interested in: Chamber approved the presentation for the fourth and final debate on the pension reform
“It was this or nothing”: Martha Alfonso
Martha Alfonso, speaker coordinator in the Chamber, assured that this is the most difficult decision she has had to make in Congress.
“They pushed us against the wall and the dead end was to decide on this proposal or have the reform collapse. Tremendous delays that led us to discuss with little time, 150 impediments, three days, 16 hours that could have been dedicated to the debate, 100 challenges that accused the parliamentarians so that the debate could not advance, 800 propositions to 94 articles, the break quorum twice, a week without discussion that was not scheduled for a hearing to be held. A president of Congress who has declared himself an enemy of this Government and who had us against the wall because if we voted for a different text there had to be conciliation and we put it in his hands not to schedule conciliation. “It was this or nothing.”
He added that there remains a judicious regulatory process by the Government. “We have the responsibility to present on July 20 a project that adjusts what is unreasonable that came out of the Senate.”
The House accepted the text that came from the Senate
With a decision widely questioned, the plenary session of the House of Representatives was inclined to leave the pension reform that the Senate had approved, anticipating that the project could sink due to time.
Controversy in the House over the proposal to approve the text that came out of the Senate
Several congressmen question that the work of the Seventh Commission of the Chamber and the plenary session be “annulled.” These are some of the interventions:
▶️ “I invite the signatories of that proposition that annuls the House of Representatives to leave UTL for the Senate”: Jhon Jairo Berrio.
▶️ “We would be creating a bad precedent. So any project that the Government presents first through the Senate and that they say they do not want to reconcile, they are going to send it to us so that we can read and sign it?”: Jennifer Pedraza.
Plenary discusses proposal to accept the text that came from the Senate
A proposal signed by Olga Lucía Velásquez, Eduard Sarmiento, David Racero, María del Mar Pizarro, among others, to accept the text that came out of the Senate.
Several congressmen criticized the proposal, arguing that the House of Representatives is not “the notary of the Senate.”
Plenary denied the proposal for the reform to be implemented in a phased manner
Catherine Juvinao, Julia Miranda Londoño and other congressmen filed a substitute proposal for article 94, which proposed that the reform come into force as follows:
▶️ The provisions that regulate what refers to the solidarity pillar would come into force in July 2025.
▶️ The contributory, semi-contributory pillars and the other changes would come into force in July 2026.
With 43 votes for yes and 77 for no, the plenary session denied the change. The House also denied the proposal that sought the reform to come into effect in July 2027.
Is Colpensiones up to the task of the pension reform?
The validity is the bone of contention in the debate in the plenary session of the House of Representatives. In this Thursday’s session, several interventions were made questioning the capabilities of Colpensiones to attend to the massive arrival of members, despite the statements of the president of the entity, Jaime Dussán.
There are 35 proposals on the table to modify the validity period, none of them have endorsement. Some of the proposals include that the implementation of the reform be staggered.
You may be interested in: The doubts generated by the pension reform of the Petro Government
Minister of Finance defends the fiscal guarantee
The Minister of Finance, Ricardo Bonilla, assured that his portfolio has accompanied the project from the beginning and has delivered two fiscal concepts, the first on October 9, 2023 and the second on June 4 of this year. “Some congressmen add and magnify the fiscal cost. (…) The project has fiscal guarantee and is sustainable.
The portfolio accounts say that the solidarity pillar costs 0.15% of the GDP, that is, $2.5 billion a year that will be financed with the General Budget of the Nation and the Pension Solidarity Fund.
We recommend: They warn that users of private funds would pay double commission with the pension
Ricardo Bonilla, Minister of Finance, in the fourth debate on the pension reform.
Photo: José Vargas
Bonilla pointed out that there is currently a deficit of 59.8% of GDP because the Government is paying Colpensiones pensions that do not cover contributions; Once the reform is approved, with the semi-contributory and contributory pillars, “the deficit that will be 51.75%. That makes the reform fiscally sustainable.”
He added that there are no infinite pension systems, that they all have to be adjusted over time: “Colombia has already done it and will continue to do it. “The reform is the most fair and equitable that can be done at this time.”
Plenary approved the first six articles
The plenary approved the first block of articles, specifically, those that did not have propositions.
▶️ Articles 51,62,66,68,84,88 were approved as they appear in the presentation.
Fourth debate on the pension reform in the plenary session of the Chamber.
Photo: José Vargas
Plenary denied proposal to first discuss the validity
Despite the arguments presented by the congressmen, including the lack of capacity of Colpensiones to take on the challenges of the reform, the Chamber denied the proposal to first discuss the validity.
“The Comptroller’s report is a lie”: Dussán
Jaime Dussán, president of Colpensiones, assured that “delaying the validity would imply stopping receiving $20 billion, which would indicate that the possibilities of giving subsidies to people under 80 years old and over 65 years old would be delayed.”
He added that the entity is prepared, that it has improved its technological system and that the Comptroller’s report “is a lie.” “The Comptroller’s Office officials have rectified the information and 15 Comptroller’s Office officials who were in the entity until last week took the information, as did the Attorney General’s Office.”
Jaime Dussán, president of Colpensiones, in the fourth debate on the pension reform.
Photo: José Vargas
The arguments for discussing the validity first
Catherine Juvinao, Jennifer Pedraza and other representatives asked that the discussion start due to the validity of the initiative.
Juvinao argued that this proposal should be voted on separately, considering that there are congressmen who support the pension reform, but who have strong doubts about the validity of the initiative, which in the presentation is established for June 2025.
“It is irrational, inconvenient, dangerous and reckless that this reform comes into effect in July of next year. Arguments that have to do with the current deficiencies of Colpensiones, the 46 regulations that this reform imposes on the National Government, the development of an information system that is highly complex, the new functions that Colpensiones will have, the institutional reorganization and the investments that They are needed to strengthen the entity,” said the representative.
Also read: The role of Colpensiones and other “buts” of the Comptroller’s Office regarding the pension reform
He added that today, with 6.7 million members, Colpensiones received between 2022 and 2023 about 800,000 requests to correct work histories, but according to the Comptroller’s Office, about 72,000 had not been resolved at the time of the review. The fiscal control body also said that of 412,000 requests for pension recognition, 40% were not recognized within the times of law.
Martha Alfonso, speaker coordinator, said that Colpensiones has given reassurance about its capabilities to face the pension’s challenges.
Denied the proposal to vote article by article
The House of Representatives denied the proposals that requested, among other things, that each article be voted on separately and that the votes be electronic, except for representatives for whom the system does not work.
Minister Luis Fernando Velasco in the debate on the pension reform of the Chamber.
Photo: José Vargas
Minister of the Interior asks that “tricks” not stop the debate
“The dignity and independence of the House of Representatives is at stake. Today we are the ones who are governing; Tomorrow, as democracy and history teach, others will govern,” said Interior Minister Luis Fernando Velasco.
He added that the rules of the game must be respected and that the pension reform is, according to the Government, “the most revolutionary in social matters in recent decades” and, according to the opposition, a project that does harm to the country. “Congress must debate the underlying elements. “The representatives cannot let small tricks, such as third-class inspections, prevent democracy from making decisions.”
Also read: “Don’t let tricks defeat democracy”: Velasco in pension debate
Velasco recalled that the Constitutional Court has said that the challenge presented by a citizen cannot result in the suspension of a legislative act. “What further clarifications are requested?”
Opposition congressmen assured that the minister “exceeded” his duties with these types of statements in the plenary session.
Minister of the Interior, Luis Fernando Velasco, in the plenary session of the House of Representatives.
Photo: José Vargas
“The Ethics Commission cannot be a mechanism to entangle projects”: Juana Carolina Londoño
Representative Juana Carolina Londoño, president of the Ethics Commission, announced that they have already finished reviewing the challenges presented to three parties and that the board of directors, with the support of the entire Ethics Commission, will file a document with the Prosecutor’s Office on Monday false complaint against the citizen who has presented massive challenges, since she did not attend the probationary period.
“The Ethics Commission cannot be a mechanism to entangle Government or parliamentary bills.” He added that on Thursday night and Friday morning more than 50 challenges have arrived that the Commission is classifying.
The pension reform proposed by the Petro Government
The Government of Gustavo Petro proposes ending the competition between Colpensiones and the Pension Fund Administrators (AFP) with the creation of a four-pillar system:
- Solidarity pillar: contemplates a basic income that will correspond at least to the extreme poverty line (about $232,000) for elderly people in poverty who cannot obtain a pension (at 65 years of age for men and at 60 years of age for women). and for people with disabilities (men over 55 years of age and women over 50).
- Semi-contributory pillar: it would benefit people (in the same age ranges as the solidarity person) who contributed between 300 and less than 1,000 weeks. In the current system, those who do not meet the week requirements are returned what they contributed (in the case of Colpensiones, without interest); With the reform, that money would become a life annuity that will have a subsidy of 20% for men and 30% for women.
You may be interested in: The most controversial points of the pension: the last debate starts this week
- Contributory pillar: according to the presentation for the fourth debate, all members of the system will contribute to Colpensiones up to 2.3 minimum wages and from then on, in one of the private funds.
- The fourth pillar is voluntary savings.
