The Justice will resolve during June the protection presented by Chubut against increases in the gas rate

The Justice will resolve during June the protection presented by Chubut against increases in the gas rate
The Justice will resolve during June the protection presented by Chubut against increases in the gas rate

In this regard, Bard warned that “none of what the national government had stated during the hearings came to fruition,” which implied a direct impact on the economy of the middle class, with increases “from 400% to 4,000% in some cases”, as detailed in dialogue with LU20.

Likewise, the official maintained that “the increase is indiscriminate and attacks salaries and takes a very large portion, in a period where gas consumption is essential for the south.” Among the measures promoted by the protection, she indicated that the Ministry of Energy and Enargas are requested to suspend the new tariff schedule and, on the other hand, that the money be refunded, if it has been applied to homes or businesses. .

Bard added that, in the case of Santa Cruz, the federal judge involved ruled that increases in service could not go beyond 300%, which they will seek to replicate in Chubut.

RESOLUTIONS
The chronology of events and exchanges that led to the current situation began in February, when the first public hearing was held where the plan for increases and removal of subsidies was presented. Several presentations were made regarding the latter, mainly regarding the “cold zones”, and after a second public hearing, increases were applied, which average around 2,000%. Through Resolutions 41/24 (Secretariat of Energy of the Nation, SEN) and 122/24 of Enargas, the gas rate was increased throughout the country, with the corresponding rate table according to the region. In the case of Chubut, the province is divided into three regions: Buenos Aires South, Chubut South and Cordillera.

“What we presented to the Court was an appeal to stop these resolutions and leave them without effect, and that this increase not take place,” said Bard in dialogue with this medium, adding that “specifically, we requested that said resolutions not take effect.” , but the increase has already reached a lot of people and not others, because it depends on the billing cycles; but the request is that these two resolutions be annulled, as happened in Santa Cruz; “That the money be returned to the people, which can be in the form of credit, and that there are no cuts due to non-payment.”
“We are avoiding large increases at this time, which is when, in our region, consumption increases,” he added.

«PREVISIBILITY»
In Santa Cruz, “in response to a similar request, the ruling of Judge Yañez de Caleta Olivia established to annul all resolutions to increase the Nation for said province, arguing that the increase is possible up to 300% of the previous cost,” he noted. the Defender.

The protection presented by the Ombudsman, of 57 pages and to which EL CHUBUT had access, indicates in its conclusion that “as a result of the drastic changes introduced in Resolutions 41/24 of the SEN and 122/24 Enargas in the tables tariffs and attentive to the magnitude of the increases and their impact on users’ income, it is notorious that guiding principles such as certainty, predictability, gradualness and reasonableness of the tariffs are not ensured, which makes said acts manifestly void. of absolute nullity and irremediable.

At the same time, the proposal points out that “every time a rate is set or authorized that is inaccessible to the majority of the population, the dignity of the human being is frustrated,” clarifying that “it is not about judges guaranteeing free public services, but, what is different, their affordability, remembering that, ultimately, the State is the owner of the service and is responsible for protecting the respective public good.

 
For Latest Updates Follow us on Google News
 

-

PREV The arrival of natural gas to the Southern region opens new perspectives also economically
NEXT What was Mike Pence doing in Cartagena, where he softened his stance towards Donald Trump? | Today news