The Senate has been the scene of a significant event: the sanction of the Law of University Financingpromoted by the opposition and approved with a resounding majority that exceeded two thirds of the votes.
This fact not only represents a political victory for the opposition parties, but also a crucial moment for the future of higher education in the country. The Law of University Financing has been a topic of debate for several months.
The proposal seeks to ensure an increase in the budget allocated to the universities national, with the aim of improving the salary conditions of teaching and non-teaching staff, as well as ensuring the proper functioning of educational institutions.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the implementation of this law would have an impact of 0.14% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), equivalent to approximately 738.595 billion pesos. The session in the Senate was intense and marked by passionate speeches from both sides of the political spectrum.
The final vote was 57 in favour, 10 against and one abstention. This result not only reflects the majority support of the opposition, but also the support of some legislators from the ruling party, which allowed the two-thirds threshold necessary for the approval of the law to be reached and surpassed.
The defenders of the law argued that higher education is a fundamental pillar for the development of the country. Eduardo De Pedro, president of the Education Committee of the Upper House, stressed that investment in education is essential for the Argentine productive model and for adding value in each of the provinces.
Law
He also stressed that the law not only seeks to increase the budget, but also to ensure that the funds are adjusted bi-monthly according to inflation, thus guaranteeing stability. financial of universities.
On the other hand, opponents of the law, including some members of the ruling party, expressed concerns about the fiscal impact of the measure. They argued that the increase in the university budget could destabilize public finances and that there are other priorities that also require urgent attention. However, these arguments were not enough to stop the approval of the law.
