this thursday, The Seventh Commission voted on almost all of the health reform. The strategy of grouping articles into blocks and purging those that did not spark major controversy worked well for the Government delegation. He was closing the discussions until there were several critical debates in Thursday’s session.
But in its strategy to move forward with more or less harmless substances, the Government was putting the bold stuff into play: it managed to circumvent the controversial points, such as the transformation of Address into the Health System’s largest payer, and to become a Health and Life Management Company to EPS under conditions that analysts said would lead to virtually wilting. of the article giving two years for.
Regarding addresses, what former Health Secretary Carolina Corcho had suggested from the beginning has finally been approved. In other words, they will manage health resources and manage payments as the “sole payer of the health system”.
In essence, this will allow transfers directly to “healthcare providers and healthcare technology providers” and advance corresponding transfers to different agents of the system.
For opposition segments, affirming these two aspects leaves the current healthcare system “dead”. This was warned by the representative, Marelen Castillo. “For those who still believe there are limits to squeezing: they approve the clause that ends EPS and turns them into state-dependent rulers (…)” said Democratic Center senator Paloma Valencia. .
While only 24 articles were published in the past sessions, 93 articles were upvoted today. There were only 31 articles with amendments, the rest were approved without changes in their writings, as they were based on the agenda presented to the parties by the Government a few weeks ago. Now there are only 22 pending and new ones confirmed by the speakers. The debate is already on the other side.
(You may be interested in: The address is super powerful after the ratification of controversial Article 60 in the Seventh Commission).
There was very little discussion at this initial stage of the debate. The majority was given by the opposition, chaired by Andrés Forero and Juan Felipe Corzo of the Democratic Center. He also made a few interventions from the representative, Jairo Humberto Cristo.
Under this modality, proposals for elimination were removed without further discussion. Likewise, texts containing propositions but not approved by the speakers were also removed. There was little defense for these texts. The opposition questioned a little.
“Since the debate has passed, our articles are finished, and we thank liberals, conservatives, and Dr. I’m worried that no proposals were accepted for Dilian. Representative Forero said this reform is increasingly similar to that of former minister Corcho.
(Don’t stop reading health reform: ‘I find it hard to believe the project came from a left-wing government’).
The first part of the discussion was limited to short breaks to raise a few issues that they felt should be discussed separately. However, the rest of the session was spent reading proposals that would not be approved. When the propositions were downvoted, they continued reading again to approve the articles that no longer suggested changes.
What a small discussion there was, the tension in the representative’s news was hidden. Alexander Quevedo of the Conservative Party, who has always voted no to the health reform project, would be suspended for signing the labor reform document.
“A dangerous quest. Practically no one can make a decision or do anything because apparently the observer initiates an investigation without having the biggest arguments. This is reckless for one. “This was a direct investigation of him,” said Quevedo, who took advantage of the silence of the debate to speak to the press.
Between the reading of proposals to be rejected and the voting of items to be approved, the intervening of Félix León Martínez, Director of the Address, and Luis Fernando Velasco, Minister of the Interior, were heard. first replied Signs from some opposition representatives that ADRES will not have sufficient infrastructure to undertake the tasks assigned to it in the approved articles.
Martínez acknowledged that at the moment ADRES may not have the infrastructure to deal with the concentration of functions as payer, but the project provisions have made adjustments to fulfill this task.
(You can also read: Health reform: scientific societies oppose ratification of Article 123).
Likewise, he responded to Andrés Forero’s accusations that he helped “copy” the Colombian system in the Dominican Republic and even partnered with what would become an EPS there. The head of Adres has admitted that he is an advocate of privatization of the health system, but now that’s his “”most loyal enemy“after realizing”inequalities“What reason?
Velasco also spoke at the session, albeit very briefly. Echoing versions of the alleged differences between the Minister of the Interior and the chief of staff of the Petro government, Laura Sarabia, the representative intervened to respond to a comment by Forero.
“Tares are anything that serves as a barrier to getting to God, I’m too old to allow myself to tare, Dr. Mondragón,” said the Home Secretary, later directly referring to rumors of cabinet differences. . “We know where we want to go and that’s why we come to these discussions. The chief of staff and we are clear about where we want to go.Velasco concluded his speech.
The ministers’ interventions led to a new block of proposals that were not approved. This time, however, there was greater resistance. Liberal representative Germán Rogelio Rozo defended his proposals on some of the Address’s problems as a payer.
(‘There will be no new text’: we recommend reading the Mondragón representative on health reform).
Despite the larger defense, it didn’t help much as they didn’t get enough votes to pass the disapproved proposals as well. In this new bloc there was a vote in favor of the existing liberals, the U, Cambio Radical and Centro Democrático. But he played against conservatives voting no on all issues.
After this brief skirmish of debate, they moved on to the longest block of the night with all the suggestions approved by the speakers. It took more than an hour to read all the texts to change in the project. A few calls were made to draw attention to the audience due to the lack of listening.
“I don’t understand why the secretary is silent when reading the propositions and why everyone starts talking when they read those propositions, this is important.”, said Agmeth Escaf, head of the commission. This was answered by the representative Christ with a joke: “Then let him read it in his mind, lest there be confusion.” The room burst into laughter. The humorous comment served as a relief for the Commission.
After a lengthy reading of the proposals, liberals urged the Centers for Primary Care to leave the bloc for articles on the transition from EPS to health and life managers and other articles by former president César Gaviria that would violate the red lines. declared by the congregation. Both representatives Germán Rozo and Héctor David Chaparro disagreed on these points.
(You may be interested in: Health reform: Why is there a dissatisfaction with the medical union with article 123?).
It was the closest, 12 votes for and 8 against. However, the liberal representative María Eugenia Lopera, who was opposed to a significant part of her party, the conservative Alexander Quevedo, who was ordered to vote no, and the absence of party representatives upset the balance. ‘U’ whose suggestions on these issues are accepted.
Then it went to a new block of approved propositions. Considering it would go ahead and approve all items, Escaf postponed the weekly session and left the final discussion until next week.
POLICY
TIME
Source: Exame
