Home News Minister Montero “stays” with the deficit, which she criticized when she was a counselor

Minister Montero “stays” with the deficit, which she criticized when she was a counselor

0
Minister Montero “stays” with the deficit, which she criticized when she was a counselor

The first vice president and Minister of Finance, María Jesús Montero now defends everything that she criticized when she was Minister of Finance of the Junta de Andalucía. So she demanded a new regional financing model that would allow the autonomous communities greater spending capacity and has not complied with it. Likewise, he requested a compensation fund for underfunded communities such as Andalusia, which receives less money than the average, a proposal that has not been addressed despite the fact that the presidents of Andalusia, the Valencian Community, the Region of Murcia and Castilla La Mancha have demanded it. And the last thing that she has failed to comply with with respect to what she herself defended when she was responsible for the Treasury in Andalusia is the unequal distribution of the deficit objectives between the State and the autonomous communities, since the former keeps a much larger percentage. highest.

In 2018For example, the then Minister of Finance and Public Administration of the Junta de Andalucía, María Jesús Montero, attacked the Rajoy Government because it balanced “its accounts thanks to communities and town councils” throughout the State and warned that “the economic miracle which Rajoy and Montoro want to boast about –by the Minister of Finance, Cristóbal Montoro– city ​​councils and communities are doing it».

The current minister demanded in those years “a more balanced distribution of the deficit objective between the State and the autonomous communities” because “you cannot continue adjusting in health, education and dependency, which is the expense where the communities have jurisdiction.”

He argued then that the latest data from the General Intervention of the State Administration on the distribution of spending in 2013 indicated that the Central administration accounted for 23.4% and the communities, 31.2%. that is, 7.8 percentage points more in the case of the regions.

That same argument works now and has even worsened, since the regions have assumed more spending. The General Intervention of the State, in its study on institutional participation in the consolidated spending of the public administration sector, indicates that in 2022 (provisional data) the State assumed 24.0% and the regions 32.0%, that is , 8% more. In 2021 the difference was even greater, because the General State Administration had a participation in spending of 22.2% and the regional administrations of 32.8, a difference of 10.6%.

This unequal distribution has become topical again because the absolute majority of the Popular Party in the Senate has definitively overturned the budget stability objectives for all public administrations in the period 2024-2026 proposed by the Government. The new path will be the one sent to the European Commission in April within the Stability Program, which would translate into a lower spending capacity for communities and town councils.

At the territorial level, the objectives that will be applied establish budgetary stability for autonomous communities – compared to the rejected 0.1% deficit – and a 0.2% surplus for city councils this year – compared to the previously proposed budget balance -, which which means giving less margin for the spending of both Administrations.

In the case of Andalusia, according to the PSOE, the lower capacity to generate a deficit will mean a cut in 600 million in spending capacity.

For his part, the Andalusian president Juanma Moreno has defended in the regional Parliament that this change will not have an impact on the 2024 regional budget because the deliveries to accounts “were, precisely, calculated downwards” while criticizing that “the “The State reserves 97% of the deficit and leaves 3% to the autonomous communities.” It is the same thing that Montero used in 2018 and that does not apply now.

source