|  ElCiudadano.cl |  Noticias

El Ciudadano

Original article: Marcel rebate a Quiroz: compensaciones por el bencinazo costaron casi lo mismo que usar el Mepco de forma habitual

Mario Marcel returned to Congress, this time to address the Finance Committee of the Chamber of Deputies, armed with data and a clear aim: to respond to the current Minister of Finance, Jorge Quiroz, and to cast doubt on one of the government’s main narratives regarding the management of rising fuel prices.

He presented a straightforward yet technical argument: the government of José Kast avoided applying the Mepco system as usual, adjusted its operations, and supplemented it with other measures, but ended up compromising resources of similar magnitude.

In other words, the method of intervention changed, but not the outcome.

Cost of the Fuel Price Surge: What Was Avoided on One Side Was Paid for on Another

To clarify further: the Mepco is the mechanism used to smooth out sudden increases in gasoline prices. In this instance, the government opted to restrict its regular use and simultaneously deployed a range of measures to cushion the financial impact on citizens.

What’s the downside? These measures also incur costs.

“This figure of US$560 million – it’s based on my own estimates – closely resembles the US$550 million that the minister mentioned as the regular cost of Mepco application. So what it tells us is that, so far, through all the compensatory benefits, almost the same amount has been spent as would have been spent using the Mepco system,” Marcel explained, according to statements captured by The Clinic.

In other words, the bonuses, subsidies, and freezes implemented to address the fuel price crisis ended up utilizing practically the same resources as the mechanism that was decided not to fully utilize.

A Bill That Continues to Grow

However, the total does not stop there. Marcel warned that if you include other expenses related to the international rise in fuel prices, the total cost is even higher.

“If we add the US$284 million that was also spent through the partial operation of the system, the total expenditures due to the international increase in fuel prices amount to US$844 million,” he indicated.

This total includes measures such as freezing public transport fares, providing bonuses to transporters, subsidies for kerosene, and support for gas, among other benefits.

And there’s a key aspect: several of these measures are not temporary, meaning they will continue to exert pressure on public spending over time.

Beyond the Numbers: The Political Point

More than a technical debate, Marcel raises a fundamental political discussion.

His thesis is that there was no real savings in limiting the use of Mepco. In practice, the state ended up committing very similar resources, just through different instruments.

In other words, the problem did not go away: it was simply managed differently.

“The Budget Doesn’t Matter to Anyone”

Another striking moment in his presentation was when he addressed the discussion surrounding the state budget, a core criticism of the current government.

He was direct: “The budget doesn’t matter to anyone, except to countries without access to credit,» he stated.

With this statement, he aimed to downplay this metric as an indicator of public financial health, arguing that it’s not a decisive factor in economies with access to funding.

No Crisis, But Pending Challenges

In conclusion, Marcel also dismissed the notion that the country is facing a fiscal crisis, as some voices have suggested.

“This is far from being a fiscal crisis or a bankrupt state,” he asserted.

However, he acknowledged that there are outstanding challenges and suggested that fiscal consolidation cannot rely solely on controlling expenditures, but must also take into account revenues and funding sources.

La entrada Mario Marcel Challenges Jorge Quiroz: Cost of Fuel Compensation Nearly Matches Regular Mepco Usage se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.