Alberto Fernández: I'm afraid the government is short of reserves by December 10

Alberto Fernández says that today, he does not know what is the real value of the dollar in Argentina. In a long interview with The voice, the Todos Front candidate has badured that, even if the US currency remains calm (in terms of official prices), the intervention of the government continues to jeopardize the reserves.

– Last Friday, the dollar "counted with liqui" closed at 72.80 pesos, and the official at 57. What is the real value of the dollar?

– And who will know … The government intervenes. We are not sorry, but we have a steady daily flow of reserves. We say the dollar is not moving, but to keep things moving, millions of dollars are going away.

-And what can it finish?

-In this we remain without reservation. That's the only thing I asked Macri not to do.

– Before which date?

– That the 10 of December we remain without reserves. The impression I have is that the government has sometimes decided to keep this ungrateful present, to spend all that was needed.

– Including the $ 5.4 billion you are trading with the IMF? Because if these $ 5.4 billion do not come, there may be a problem with the government.

-The problem is what they come for. In June, when I met with the Fund, I showed him that at that time they gave us $ 39 billion out of the $ 57 billion agreed. And from the moment money first came in until he spoke, $ 39 billion came in and $ 30 billion went away.

I told the IMF: "You are lending money to a compulsive spender." That is not why the money had to arrive in Argentina. "

– In any case, it is also used to pay commitments.

– Yes, but the proportion is 39 billion, of which 9 billion in payment commitments. And 30 billion for escape.

-For the mattress.

-The leak consists of removing the dollar from the financial system. Some go to the mattress, some to the security boxes and some leave the country.

– Would you prefer that $ 5.4 billion be paid to the next government?

– That I give it to the government, but that the government agrees to use it accordingly. Because the government, whatever comes in, uses it to finance the flight of capital. That's what's been going on for a year. (Minister) Lacunza seems to have understood the idea of ​​that.

– maintains the position that the IMF is morally responsible for what happened in Argentina?

– No, practically. Not only morally. To have badumed the commitment, to have loaned it, to have seen how the delivery of money had evolved and to have done nothing …

-In this regard, do you intend to raise it during a renegotiation?

– I already raised it. And I spoke with Pedro Sánchez (President of the Government of Spain) and with (Antonio) Costa (Prime Minister of Portugal). They have representatives at the Monetary Fund. But also, we told the IMF at the first meeting in June.

– You said: "They urge me with re-inflation by debt, what do I think? Is not it a matter of private creditors who fear what can be agreed with the IMF? " What do you mean by that?

– That said, the IMF demands that private creditors adopt a more severe attitude … But I do not want to intervene in the solution finally found by the government. Nobody has ever consulted me. Neither by the declaration of fault in national currency, neither by reperfilamiento nor by stocks. Person I always knew after the events.

– Has there ever been a previous meeting where some directives have been agreed?

– Never.

– Do you agree that reperfilation has the force of law?

– I do not understand what is reperfilation.

– There are Peronist lawmakers who say that if they did not ask for debt according to the law, a law was not needed now.

– In reality, you do not need a law. I explained it to the president. Perhaps if the president has exercised his mandate and proceeded to reprofiling, once the negotiation is over, in order to give the creditors peace of mind, he should be submitted to Congress. On that I would agree. In fact, the President asks me, after all that he said, to legally grant him the right to sit down and negotiate with the creditors. And … it scares me a little.

-If you become president, you will need to support reperfilation.

– Besides, yes. But my problem is not that there is a reperfilation. I always prefer that there be a reperfilation, that is, a neologism that says, "I can not pay you."

– Or I'll pay you here in a little more.

– of course. Well, they say that there is no takeaway in the reperfilation. And in restructuring, yes. I prefer that there be a reperfilation. The problem is how they negotiate. Because what they have negotiated up to now is a scare.