In the first half of January, the government accepted the mistake. The act of repentance is not irrelevant, as it violently rejected any criticism of the new extraordinary support given to workers in the debate on the state budget for 2021 weeks ago. Galileo would say that reality always wins over propaganda. The OE 2021 was less than a month old and the government was already raising from the ashes the support for the division of activities that had been initiated in 2020 because the new support proved to be a flop – it left many people unprotected and was obviously inadequate the face of the aftermath of a new wave of pandemics.
On January 14, after the Council of Ministers at the Palácio da Ajuda, Minister Siza Vieira announced that workers providing green receipt services or other independent professionals “are starting to regain support in the past year”. Government number two was overwhelming in its intent. In fact, the verb “restore” was also used in the preamble text of Legislative Decree No. 6-E / 2021 of January 15, in which the intention of the government was enacted with the code: “The suspension of activities and the closure for facilities and facilities must support measures for the self-employed are also restored. For the avoidance of doubt, this preamble explains that the exceptional support for the reduction in activity in 2020 “supported 170,000 professionals and consisted of financial support and postponement of contribution obligations”.
What could be the chronicle of announced support suffers an unexpected setback and becomes almost drama. After all, there was a legal trap that led to a significant cut in events in 2020 – the so-called “financial support” was no longer calculated according to the 2019 result and began to be based on the 2020 result were severely affected by the pandemic. In order to dispel this misunderstanding, the Assembly of the Republic approved a correction to the Legislative Decree and set 2019 as the reference for the calculation of support for self-employed and managing partners. Problem solved. Or maybe not …
What the solution was to tens of thousands of workers was inexplicably slandered by the government. I admit I didn’t expect it. I found it natural to be grateful that I recognized the problem and adapted the diploma to the announced goal. However, it wasn’t a defect, it was ugly. The pride in “winning back” financial support that “supported 170,000 professionals” was not that real.
The legal caricature of the government’s argument is that the amendment made in Parliament violates the “Braking Act” and may jeopardize budget spending ceilings. That’s absurd
The rest will go down in history as a minority government’s war against parliament, calling on a right-wing president of the republic to veto a diploma that improves basic social support at a time when the country is going through a major economic crisis. Gone are the days when MPs and MPs of the PS went to the Constitutional Court to question cuts in wages and pensions. Now they are repealing the constitution to reduce social support. I did not expect such a betrayal of “apparatus”.
The legal caricature of the government’s argument is that the amendment made in Parliament violates the “Braking Act” and may jeopardize budget spending ceilings. This is absurd as, by definition, there is no pre-defined deadline for any action in place during detention, as no one knows how long detention can be throughout the year in early January. On the other hand, as seen last year, the government spent much less than it budgeted for social assistance.
The PS said the changes made in parliament could lead to an increase in spending of € 38 million per month. In the third month of the detention period we are entering these days, the additional cost would be 114 million euros spread across a universe of 130,000 people, each with an average grant of 300 euros. Interestingly, it is a figure that is identical to the tax burden that EDP shareholders received in one fell swoop with government approval. But, computing, it’s social support augmentation that she takes seriously.
The author writes according to the new orthographic convention