[ad_1]
Against, votes in favor
During the debate in the House, several voices were raised criticizing the treaty, although this was not reflected in the result of the vote, which only had the negative vote of deputy of the Popular Unit Eduardo Rubio.
The People's Victory Party (a deputy) and the Socialist Party (four deputies) voted in favor of "party discipline" but clearly expressed their opposition to the FTA.
The case of the Socialist Party is peculiar, because unlike the Senate, where its caucus (two representatives) is occupied by the legislators of the most moderate wing (Mónica Xavier and Daisy Tourné), the "orthodox" predominate (Gonzalo Civila, Roberto Chiazzaro and Mónica Barreiro). The other Socialist deputy is Enzo Malán, who also voted against the treaty, as Chiazzaro said in his speech
"As a result of party discipline, we will vote affirmatively on a treaty with which we do not agree ". the deputy, who said to speak "on behalf of all the caucus of the Socialist Party."
Chiazzaro added that the negotiations between the governments of Uruguay and Chile was made "secretly" and said that the signing of an agreement of this type. "
MP Luis Puig, of the PVP, also baderted his affirmative vote by respecting the decision of the political force." We are far from thinking that the FTAs are the key to the happiness of the people, "he said. declared.
José Carlos Mahía (astorismo) and Daniel Caggiani (MPP) were some of the pro-government legislators who defended the treaty. "We understand that this treaty is good news for the country because it is safe. 39, inscribed in the search for better opportunities so that the products generated in our country can be put in the world, in this case Chile, an opportunity for Uruguay, "said Mahía, and affirmed that "the FTA" is in the general guidelines approved at the last Congress. "
Caggiani, meanwhile, criticized Rubio." You try to impose false oppositions, when you badyze the world, the reality is a little more complex than the speeches of pamphle T, said Caggiani
Rubio does not remain silent and responds. "To justify the ideological leaps is not enough to qualify, you must base, and you must have some consistency in thinking," said the legislator. "We continue to vote as we would have voted 10 years ago," he concluded.
Source:
[ad_2]
Source link