The university supports an initiative that could compromise the balance of public accounts achieved by the government
According to a report by the Congressional Budget Office, that law implied a fiscal cost of 0.14% of GDP, equivalent to $738,595 million. The Government maintained that giving in to spending demands without real financing would be a return to structural deficit. For this reason, it continues to firmly uphold its commitment to balanced public accounts as the central axis of its administration.
UNC's support for this new bill reflects a position that supposedly prioritizes the strengthening of the public education system. However, the national Government warns that this initiative could compromise the fiscal balance achieved. President Milei keeps that keeping the surplus is essential for the country's economic stability.
The discussion on university financing presents a dilemma between guaranteeing the sustainability of the education system and preserving fiscal discipline. The Government insists that giving in to sectoral pressures could undo the progress made since December 2023. The challenge is to move forward with deep reforms without falling back into fiscal populism.
The Honorable Superior Council of UNC unanimously approved support for the bill and called on Córdoba's legislators to back it. Rector Jhon Boretto highlighted that the proposal arises from a multisectoral consensus among universities, unions, and students. The aim is to guarantee the sustainability of the public university system in light of the critical budgetary situation.
Among the central points of the bill are the adjustment of operating expenses according to INDEC's CPI and the increase of student scholarships. The bill also proposes to call for salary negotiations based on accumulated inflation since December 2023. These measures seek to shield the university system from the fluctuations of fiscal policy.
In 2024, President Javier Milei rightfully vetoed the University Financing Bill approved by Congress. He argued that the initiative lacked adequate budgetary planning and required additional resources that would affect fiscal balance. The president emphasized, on repeated occasions, that the surplus is non-negotiable.
