What need had PP, having absolute majority, to resort as many times as it did to procedure of legislating by decree law by way of urgency? Was it so compelling, for example, to cut aid to long-term unwelled persons as to resort to a path that prevents amendments and hurta parliamentary debate? No, re was no need, so Constitutional Court has just cancelled that reform, arguing that procedure used, reserved for exceptional situations, was not justified. The judgement serves an appeal presented by 50 socialist deputies but verdict, with being positive, leaves a bitter aftertaste. The damage is done and all suffering that se cuts provoked will not be repaired anymore.
What happened shows how easy it is, from a certain conception of exercise of power, to legislate against most vulnerable, those who have only capacity to respond and pension, and how difficult it is to reverse effects. The two subsidy reforms for long-term unpaid were approved in 2012 and 2013, in midst of economic crisis, and hardened reby requirements, which thousands of unpaid persons lost right to receive a benefit.
First it rose from 52 to 55 years minimum age to be able to apply for help. Then compulsory retirement age was established at 61 years, when until n allowance could be received up to 65. This change had catastrophic effects for thousands of unprepared, because while y charged allowance y continued to quote to Social security. The reform forced m to retire four years earlier, with corresponding cut in amount of pension, which is what y will charge for rest of ir lives. This aggravated a history of contributions already severely punished by fact of losing employment and lowering price at an age in which it is difficult to find work and re is still a stretch for retirement.
The auction was to establish that from that reform, individual income of unemployed person would not be accounted for, but of whole family unit. This change dismounted many of those who had hirto been entitled to subsidy, as all family income and divided by number of members were added, amount should be less than 75% of minimum interprofessional wage (SMI). In 2013 SMI was 654.30 euros per month, which means that a stand with a wife employed lost right to subsidy only with that it was mileurista, as total income divided by two could not exceed 490 euros.
These are dimensions of accounts of poor, those who are at risk of exclusion. From coldness of a legislative text, y may seem abstract, but each of modifications struck thousands of concrete people, life histories that were altered. According to last survey of active population, currently re are in Spain 539,000 unprepared of more than 55 years, 72% of m long-term, but only perceive subsidy 270,000. The constitutional has declared null procedure of reform of one of se decrees, which imposed to compute family income, but it has no retroactive effect. It is now up to government to protect most vulnerable and to return m, through new legislative changes, which y should never have lost.
You can follow country opinion on Facebook, Twitter or subscribe here to Newsletter.Share in Facebook share on Twitter OtrosCerrarCompartir at LinkedinCompartir on GooglePlusCompartir on Pinterest