Her role as spokesperson for “Aproba x Chile” and her management as president of the Constitution Commission are the two factors that could eventually prevent Karol Cariola (PC) from leading the next board of directors of the Chamber of Deputies, as as was explained in the “governance agreement” signed on March 11 by the benches of the PC, PDG, DC, PS, PS, PPD, the FA, PR, FRVS and independents from that sector.
The signed document indicates that on October 21 the current board of directors, led by Raúl Soto (PPD), must resign, leaving the presidency of the Lower House in the hands of the Communist Party, with Cariola at the helm. But the agreement began to falter months ago, precisely when the deputy took over as spokesperson for the official Approval command, adding critical voices once the Rejection was imposed in the exit plebiscite.
It is that some sectors of the Christian Democracy (DC) and the People’s Party (PDG) – also pressured by the right – have questioned the representativeness of the communist parliamentarian, adding to this the apprehension that she could exercise a similar leadership which she used when she chaired the Constitution Commission, where she is particularly remembered for her boisterous role in preventing the approval of the fifth and sixth withdrawals of the AFPs.
Faced with this scenario, both parliamentary benches –both from the DC and from the PDG– will have a litmus test in this discussion, because while some of their deputies seek to comply with the agreement of last March, others assure that they want to leave behind the logic of “cooking” political agreements in the corridors of Congress, being open to negotiating with Chile Let’s go to avoid the change of the presidency of the Lower House promised for next October 21. A decision that set off the alarms in La Moneda and aroused discomfort among official sectors, such as the PS and the PC.
It was the Minister Secretary General of the Presidency (Segpres), Ana Lya Uriarte, who reacted to the eventuality that the pact agreed on last March is abandoned, warning that the parliamentarians who reached the governance agreement on rotation in the presidency of the Chamber of Deputies and Deputies must “honor their word”, because in their opinion, “the agreements are celebrated to be fulfilled”.
Minister Uriarte believes that “agreements must be fulfilled. Why? So that citizens have clarity that when parliamentarians make agreements and decisions, they are fulfilled and their word is honored (…) The agreement is in force and I I imagine it will be fulfilled to honor the word of the parliamentarians. The information I handle is that there is an administrative agreement that was adopted in good faith by the different political forces, through their parliamentarians. “
Then it was the deputy Karol Cariola herself who came out against the controversy, assuring that the veto that the People’s Party (PDG) would impose to stop her arrival at the presidency of the Lower House, would be an “excuse to agree with the right “. Likewise, the communist parliamentarian adds that “the agreement does not incorporate particular or personal vetoes”, pointing out that “if any political force has the decision to assume a link with another sector – in this case with the right – I think that is an element that you have to be honest with all discussions, and not make excuses for personal vetoes”.
The unknown that parliamentarians who feel supported by the Rejection intend to do to deputy Cariola, could even – in the opinion of the official deputies – cast doubt on the agreements for the other presidencies, which would lead to a depreciation of the agreements, something that results very important when moving forward with version 2.0 of the constituent process. Moreover, they maintain, this could put more obstacles to the Government’s legislative projects, an agreement by agreement with the PDG and other legislators off the hook, could lead the right to impose its own legislative agenda, going over the common minimums.
The decisive vote of the PDG
In this regard, the deputy of the PDG, Gaspar Rivas – who is one of the main faces against Cariola assuming her position as president of the Chamber – believes that “part of the old policy is this issue of agreements between corridors, the lobby, and the merely instrumental agreements, which are part of the kitchen of the old politics.That is why, from my point of view, the most important reason to void the agreement signed in March is because the majority of the militancy is asking us to do so, and For the same reason, the PDLG would be slamming the door on the agreements that are generated by the political leadership, because they go against the feelings of the vast majority of our militancy.
In that sense, Rivas adds that “we also have to take into consideration that between March and now, certain things have happened that were not on the table at that time, such as the Approval campaign, in addition to the controversy over the fifth and sixth withdrawals , which are elements that we have to take into consideration when making a decision (…) From that point of view, it generates noise in my mind that, if she can have the capacity to block this type of initiative in the Constitution Commission, from the head of the Chamber, could apply the same strategy of blocking bills in defense of its Government”.
The PDG, therefore, would seek to align a majority of its nine votes in the instance that will settle said discussion, adopting a risky position that could put its limited political capital in check. If they finally adopt the path outlined by Gaspar Rivas- prioritizing the voice of their militancy over the subsistence of their party within the distribution of forces in Congress- and decide to break an agreement that they themselves signed seven months ago, the question that could settle is around how much this decision could damage the credibility of a conglomerate that demands to be respected and valued as an influential political force.
Precisely, one of the PDG deputies who understands it this way is Rubén Oyarzo, who assures that “it is true that in the militancy it generates noise and that you have to listen to that militancy. However, this is an administrative issue, it is not an alliance neither a legislative nor a political alliance, but rather it is only an administrative agreement and I am about to fulfill the agreement that we assumed in March (…) I cannot deny that there is tension and that Karol Cariola’s name makes noise. The proposal that we will propose to the bench is to change the periods, castling and advancing the period of the DC. I think this can be a healthy alternative to prevent the agreement from falling.”
In this way, in the next few days, in the corridors of the Chamber of Deputies, the final decision will be made, regarding who will take office today in the hands of the PPD Raúl Soto- who, in the midst of the tension, would have stated his intention to apply for a second term. It is that in the last few hours there have been many speculations and the names proposed by the different benches, including where Chile’s interest would be. We are going to nominate the head of the RN bench, Andrés Longton. Finally, the decision would go through a PDG that could tip the balance and make the agreement agreed on March 11 fall, listening to its militant bases and putting its credibility at risk, which would generate the discomfort of a Communist Party that could continue to reduce its interference in the first line of political action, losing a key position in the game of power, such as the presidency of the Lower House.
