The congresswoman of the Purple Party and former Minister of Education flower paul points out that the government must make more forceful gestures against the university counter-reform law. He demanded that peter castle try to convince congressmen to Free Perubecause with your votes what was approved this week could be stopped.
President Pedro Castillo has said that he will observe the law against the university reform. Congress can pass it by insistence. Do you think it is a sufficient gesture, or do you expect something more from the government?
Much stronger action is needed from the Executive. The minister has not come out to face a majority in Congress that affects Sunedu and the leading role of the Ministry of Education. There is something that has gone unnoticed. From an autonomous board of directors, it has become one of more political representatives…
Very similar to what the National Assembly of Rectors (ANR) was at the time.
That’s how it is. But there is another important thing. The objective of the law has been changed, which is to “regulate the creation, operation, supervision and closure of universities.” That phrase, which is the heart of the law, has been removed.
YOU CAN SEE: In eight months, Congress hired 758 more workers
Sunedu could not close a university that does not meet the required quality standards, for example.
Correct. They remove the leading role from the ministry, they change the composition to Sunedu and then we return to the previous scheme. That is why it has been insisted that it is one of the most dangerous counter-reforms for the university system because what it does is dismantle what has been advanced. Before, universities…
They were judge and jury.
That’s how it is.
What else could Castillo do, outside of observing the law?
The party to which he belongs should make his change of position public. Of the total number of congressmen from Peru Libre, only five voted against the counter-reform. If PL were to back down and back their president, we would have votes to change this. For this reason, I would expect a president summoning his caucus and a much more active Minister of Education. We have seen the superintendent (of Sunedu) in a solitary defense. Stronger and more solid action is needed. The minister must be aware that he is deprived of absolute stewardship.
YOU CAN SEE: They demand to observe the bill that withdraws the gender approach
Do you really believe that the president can convince his caucus?
I, the truth… they (PL) have been promoters of this law so I see this scenario as complicated. At least my expectation is to see the gesture. I am realistically assuming that the PL caucus is going to hold its ground.
Would the option to reverse the law be through the Constitutional Court, then?
The stage is citizen action. The Congress he has to feel that the majority of the citizenry does not agree with this counter-reform. There are groups that are organizing to initiate the action of unconstitutionality and those are the type of actions that are needed now. It is time for citizen mobilization to point out to Congress its serious error in disrupting the system, with a governing ministry, with a superintendency and with university autonomy but with limits, because you cannot do everything you want. Autonomy yes, but with checks and balances.
Beyond the fact that this rule is a big step backwards, it must also be said that the reform needs improvement, correct?
Of course. This is not a defense of a reform that we consider perfect. It has room for improvement. That is why in the parliamentary bloc in favor of the reform we have presented projects that seek to strengthen it. It has been proposed that all members of Sunedu be by competition, where everything is by merit.
YOU CAN SEE: The Legislative and all the times in which they tried to acquire products at extra cost
There are actors who claim not to have been active parties to the reform.
The rectors and other university actors say they have not participated. Possibly, it is true, they have not been very close. That is why an advisory council has also been proposed. That means that they will be able to participate, with a voice but without a vote, because Sunedu’s autonomy must be taken care of.
I change the subject. Do you think that advancing general elections can help alleviate the crisis?
I think so. We are in a political crisis generated by the government’s incapacity, with its signs of corruption and unqualified officials. And we are also facing a Congress that plays against national interests. It is a situation in which there is mistrust and discredit for the Executive and the Legislative. In a context like that, added to the polarization that has not been overcome, I believe that elections should be held early. But…
With reform?
It is that what we are experiencing is a known story. In the end, that affects the citizen. The political crisis affects the table, the food. So, yes, an early election but with a minimum agreement on some reforms.
The point is that this reform would have to be approved by this discredited Congress.
Other paths must be explored. We are at a time to see routes, but the issue is that there is no consensus among parliamentarians. Would this Congress make the new rules? It is a possibility that does not necessarily generate confidence.
So?
We could move towards a mandate cut. That is, new general elections, not for five years but to complete the period, with a transition government and institutional reconstruction that makes basic reforms. Cut the presidential term and the Congress. We are going all.