This is an idea that has been circulating in the technical world, but is now starting to gain strength as it is becoming clear that this government, like the previous one, will close its mandate without structural reforms to increase pensions. That President-elect Gabriel Boric have their own suggestions.
How do I get results now?
It is here that the idea of generating a new process of social, political and technical dialogue was conceived more than a year ago by economists and experts on pensions. Paula Benavides, began to make its way. In fact, the local team of the International Labor Organization (ILO) and the Public Space have systematized international experience on social dialogue and governance of social security reform.
“It is important to initiate extensive social dialogue and transverse technical discussions as soon as possible to refine the design of future reforms. [de pensiones], which enables it to provide legitimacy and sustainability over time”, it is read in the future government program.
AFP watchdog Guillermo Larrain, who coordinated the convergence of programs on this issue after the first round, said in TIMETABLE that this proposal is “not yet fully resolved” and that there are “unresolved” issues.
Days before the vote, economist Guillermo Larraín, who worked with Yasna Provoste, said that “we haven’t managed to work out all the points,” for example, “the role of the AFP.”
Why the new commission?
Benavides, who is also a member of Autonomous Fiscal Council (CFA), considers that at this point in the debate it is necessary to make visible issues that have lost centrality. “We have to admit that pension reform is technically complex and having a good design is very important, but not enough,” he said. This shows that political capacity is also needed to implement it and administrative capacity for change to take place.
To this it is added that structural change implies a transition “that in retirement lasts decades”, so how this process is carried out over time is “as important as the regime of a system.” All of this must be looked at in its entirety, to avoid that “great designs later have no political viability or unforeseen practical impediments arise”.
Most countries address these types of challenges “with some kind of commission or participatory structure, which allows technical expertise as well as political shielding to be processed,” he said. His passion is in one that integrates technical, social and political views on retirement and cites as an example: Retirement Board of Trustees FranceWhile fulfilling other roles, he has representatives from Congress, the world of work, employers, retirees, experts, and public agencies.
He admits that “by saying now that a new commission on pensions is needed, many people may feel it is a waste of time, that the diagnosis is in place or not necessary.” But he insists that even though it seems like a long way to go, “without this process we can go back to square one again, which should be avoided.”
After 10 years of debate, the Netherlands agreed to change its distribution mechanism. Sweden has one that is adapting and that has led to people retiring at an older age.
“Perhaps it is time to look for other mechanisms to reach this agreement [en pensiones]”, says economist and academic from the University of Adolfo Ibáñez (UAI) Andrea Repetto. He added that some countries (such as Spain, the UK, Sweden and Uruguay) have achieved sustainable change over time through “commissions with a clear mandate, namely to reach agreement, made up of political and civil society actors, representatives of workers and employers.” and academia.” Repetto was a member of the advisory board of economist Gabriel Boric in the final stages of the campaign.
The specialist also warns that if the Universal Guaranteed Pension (PGU) project is approved, “which also has financing problems, reduces the chances of reaching such an agreement for more structural changes in the system, with greater savings and a collective fund that has an expenditure design that allows risk sharing. sustainably”.
Salvador Valdes, an economist and professor at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, believes that setting up a new example “is a good idea”, but on one condition: “That the new authorities, both the Executive and the Congress, publicly commit to compiling the recommendations shown to be very it is important to avoid damage in connection with the current retirement situation”.
Economist Cecilia Cifuentes, member of the Retirement Advisory Board and former spokesperson for the economics team Jose Antonio Kasto, predicting that Pension reform will probably be one of the most important policies of the future government. “We are at a point where there is a clear distinction between the proposals being made. In that sense, I sympathize with the idea of setting up a technical commission seeking an agreement,” he said.
But he pointed out that it was important “to establish beforehand that the agreement reached at the technical level should be a little more binding for the political world.” Remember that a commission chaired by economists David Bravo in 2015 he put forward a series of proposals “which the political world did not take up despite the urgency. Replicating the same thing seems to me far-fetched.”
Representatives from Kast, Sichel, Provoste and Boric agreed to a universal pension, but differed radically on what to do with additional contributions.