Constituents and experts point out that the Executive’s constitutional reform opens the way for the issue to be discussed again in the chamber of deputies. The text was approved in Congress, but comments are expected.

The opposition commented that they will make several requests. First, that the Executive add another of its demands to the bill of law: that the freedom of contributors to choose who will manage their funds be ratified; and second, to speed up the discussion — its current status is simple emergency — so that it can be discussed before the withdrawal reaches the Senate.

In a single article, the Executive points out that the initiative “seeks to address the existing concern regarding the saved funds (…) in any future pension reform,” and confirms “an absolute commitment to respect the ownership of pension funds saved in workers’ accounts,” pointing out that this safeguard is “absolutely extraordinary in our legal system.” It adds that “as a result of this guarantee, the inheritance of these funds will continue to be governed by the rules described above.” The bill of law was received with approval and criticism among the congressmen who demanded it.

In fact, several of them mentioned the Government’s influence on the Constitutional Convention which had rejected the “not with my money” proposals some weeks previously, which specifically sought to provide this constitutional protection to the ownership of the funds. The head of the UDI caucus, Jorge Alessandri, described it as “a step in the right direction” but that “it is necessary to confirm the freedom to choose a fund manager (…) there is progress, of course; this helps to orientate the conversation in the Constitutional Convention as well” while his counterpart Guillermo Ramírez said that, although it was what they had committed to, “we must make some adjustments to the text.” RN deputy Frank Sauerbaum was more critical, saying that “it does not leave any sector happy” and that “we expect a change of attitude from the Government regarding the Constitutional Convention (…) the government cannot present us with a ‘botched job’ and a hurried bill of law simply to seek support. We do not believe that the government is convinced that the funds should not be confiscated.” The initiative was submitted with simple urgency and will be discussed by the Constitutional Commission of the Chamber of Deputies.

To review the bill of law on fund ownership, click here .