At this report linked here, Critica has brought together the reactions of voices worth listening to, and from all parts of the political and economic spectrum. It's a good note, and between them they capture the feeling on the street. The truth is mixed up somewhere between these views, so i've taken the time out to translate the quotes. FWIW I personally think Mondino has got the right view of this. Here we go:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hugo Moyano, General Secretary of the main CGT union: The change in the AFJP is one of the best measures (announced by the gov't). I believe that we're not wrong when we call (the AFJPS) one of the scams imposed on Argentinians. Once and for all, these deals have to disappear and then start to build a serious pensions system. Only the State can guarantee a pension for all workers.
Eduardo Mondino, Defender of the People (ombudsman): Transferring these funds to the ANSeS (the state pensions body) is putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. The transfer has to be by consensus and with the participation of all citizens that have contributed all these years. Congress should establish a control mechanism to oversee and limit the use of these funds. The AFJPs have shown themselves to be ineffective, but I don't want my funds looked after by (head of ANSeS Amado) Boudou who can now do whatever he wants with them.
Claudio Lozano, member of parliament: This implies the granting of solidity to the Argentine state and puts us in better conditions to face the (world financial) crisis. We are happy that the gov't has looked inthis direction. We are sorry that once again the opportunity has been lost of forging a parliamentary unity with content and we hope that this decision does not have the sole intention of getting money to pay the public debt, but also that it has the vision of improving the situationof our pensioners.
Elisa Carrió, opposition leader (left-leaning): Out of the present context it can be seen as a worthy initiative, but in the present national and international context in which we live this is a money grab. This has already happened at ANSeS. We saw that free-placement of pensions was a con and that they do not want a real pension increase for pensioners but want to use this money to pay debt or add to national funds for next year."
María América González, member of parliament: The private pensions system doesn't work, but we must control the use of funds. The AFJP system is not a guaranteed pension scheme but bourse capitalization without profits not guarantees. The AFJPs have made U$12Bn in commissions since 1994. It's difficult to be in favor or against (this move). As perhaps the AFJPs have 70% of funds invested in treasury bills and bonds that nobody capitalizes and is paid by the state. AFJPs never lose.
Miguel Kiguel, economist, former Finance Secretary: It has a positive effect becasue there will be more funds to pay debt. The most worrying is that they change the rules from oone day to the next without the necessary consulting process. Today it's the AFJP and tomorrow who? Why can't this be done via a wider discussion? It still has to pass through Congress and I don't know what decisions they'll make there.
Eduardo Mondino, Defender of the People (ombudsman): Transferring these funds to the ANSeS (the state pensions body) is putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. The transfer has to be by consensus and with the participation of all citizens that have contributed all these years. Congress should establish a control mechanism to oversee and limit the use of these funds. The AFJPs have shown themselves to be ineffective, but I don't want my funds looked after by (head of ANSeS Amado) Boudou who can now do whatever he wants with them.
Claudio Lozano, member of parliament: This implies the granting of solidity to the Argentine state and puts us in better conditions to face the (world financial) crisis. We are happy that the gov't has looked inthis direction. We are sorry that once again the opportunity has been lost of forging a parliamentary unity with content and we hope that this decision does not have the sole intention of getting money to pay the public debt, but also that it has the vision of improving the situationof our pensioners.
Elisa Carrió, opposition leader (left-leaning): Out of the present context it can be seen as a worthy initiative, but in the present national and international context in which we live this is a money grab. This has already happened at ANSeS. We saw that free-placement of pensions was a con and that they do not want a real pension increase for pensioners but want to use this money to pay debt or add to national funds for next year."
María América González, member of parliament: The private pensions system doesn't work, but we must control the use of funds. The AFJP system is not a guaranteed pension scheme but bourse capitalization without profits not guarantees. The AFJPs have made U$12Bn in commissions since 1994. It's difficult to be in favor or against (this move). As perhaps the AFJPs have 70% of funds invested in treasury bills and bonds that nobody capitalizes and is paid by the state. AFJPs never lose.
Miguel Kiguel, economist, former Finance Secretary: It has a positive effect becasue there will be more funds to pay debt. The most worrying is that they change the rules from oone day to the next without the necessary consulting process. Today it's the AFJP and tomorrow who? Why can't this be done via a wider discussion? It still has to pass through Congress and I don't know what decisions they'll make there.