January 24, 2022 2:03 pm

Axel Kicillof responded to Horacio Rodríguez Larreta for missing the IMF meeting: “They’re a bunch of cheeks.”

The Government tries to generate consensus so that the opposition, and especially Together for Change, endorses an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). But also for the multi-year plan, which would be the basis to show to the authorities of the credit agency.

Before a first call by Minister Martín Guzmán To the governors of all the parties, the leaders of the hard wing of the opposition coalition reacted with a strong rejection. This Tuesday at Casa Rosada, the minister will give details to the ruling governors and envoys of the radical leaders on the progress of the negotiations with the IMF. But there will be an absentee with notice: the head of the Buenos Aires government, Horacio Rodríguez Larreta.

“We understand that, as it is raised, it is a political meeting. And we said it a thousand times: the sphere of dialogue and agreement is, and should be, the National Congress. The heads of the JxC parliamentary blocs were not even invited to the meeting, so we insist that the scope of discussion has to be the National Congress, ”said the Buenos Aires head of government yesterday.

Axel Kicillof, governor of the province of Buenos Aires, participated in an act and a meeting at the Villa Gesell Golf Club.Tomás Cuesta – THE NATION

Today, in a hand in hand with LA NACION, the Buenos Aires governor Axel Kicillof he charged hard against Larreta. “Not wanting to find a solution to the disaster they made is incredibly irresponsible. That credit was taken by them, between roosters and midnight, and it was a political credit. They are cheeky “, She complained.

In a visit to Villa Gesell -before he was in Mar del Plata-, Kicillof charged against the claim of the Buenos Aires head of government that the discussion has to take place in Congress. “Go see how many times, when I was a spokesperson for my bloc in Deputies, I asked that the debt issue be passed through Parliament. If they had, this would not have happened “, he specified to this medium.

The governor recalled a talk he gave a few days after Macri’s inauguration. “I remember when we gave a talk at Parque Centenario, it’s on YouTube. It was December 19, 2015 and I anticipated that this would end at the International Monetary Fund. And not because he had a crystal ball, not even because one has devoted himself to economic history, but because Macri’s economic program was one of indebtedness and flight. From day one. Since they paid the vultures, since they began to borrow us on Wall Street, to fully open the capital account, it ended like this, it continued like this and the truth is that it was inevitable that it would end in a catastrophe as it did, ”he said.

Axel Kicillof, governor of the province of Buenos Aires, participated in an act and a meeting at the Villa Gesell Golf Club.
Axel Kicillof, governor of the province of Buenos Aires, participated in an act and a meeting at the Villa Gesell Golf Club.Tomás Cuesta – THE NATION

For Kicillof, that was a political credit, “confessed both by US officials, as well as by Argentine officials and even Macri himself, who practically thanked (Donald) Trump and it seems to me that today, at this point, he does not want to find the solution The disaster they made is an incredible responsibility. I never heard them say that when Macri took the loan he had to go to Parliament, “he complained.

-Do you think there has to be an exit in accordance with the Fund or is there an exit without an agreement?

-Of course you have to find an agreement but where the Fund itself starts from the recognition that it was sent.

-With the revision you did?

-And well, there are very clear elements. They say there that the previous government put a red line, which it was not willing to do, the control of capital and exchange issues, but later Macri himself did it, because the stocks were set by Macri. The debt was defaulted by Macri. It has been a succession of economic malpractice that was fully validated by the Fund. The IMF has to recognize the exceptionality that the entire process had, the exceptionality it had (to name it, because we have to see if its Argentine statutes and laws were violated, but let’s call it that), the response and the proposal that Argentina It has to take into account that a credit given in an absolutely disproportionate, exceptional way, in a condescending way with a government that did not do what had to be done not even to protect the resources of generations; in this sense, the response of the Fund must have the same exceptionality.

-So the review made by the Fund is not enough?

-Well, if the problem was that the credit was given without the necessary conditions, that it was later allowed to be used for capital flight, a concept that they mention, that the government refused to adopt the policy of administration of administrative resources that the Fund itself recommended… if it has four legs, a tail, it barks, it is a dog. So it seems to me that in that sense the problem is what definitions do you take with respect to the agreements that Argentina proposes?


Comments (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *