Uruguays president defends questionable referendum law

Uruguay’s president defends questionable referendum law

Montevideo, March 24 (Prensa Latina) The President of Uruguay, Luis Lacalle Pou, defended the emergency law (LUC) in question at the end of the campaign to vote no to the repeal of 135 articles, which today shows a surge of three days in a referendum .

In contrast to the sevenminute appearance on the national network that was approved for the yes supporters, the head of government avoided a fair intervention and benefited from a press conference of around an hour.

His speech consisted of an account of senior management in the face of the pandemic and championing the LUC’s most criticized content in the areas of public safety, education, restrictions on the right to strike, rents and the tax code.

To the only six questions asked, he replied that if the yes wins, “it won’t be the same,” but if the no wins, other controversial legislation will move forward in parliament, including the rejected welfare reform project.

Former VicePresident Lucía Topolansky called it unbalanced that the President had opted for a press conference, a far cry from precedents like Julio María Sanguinetti and Luis Lacalle Herrera, who did the opposite in previous more important referendums.

Leaders and ministers of the coalition of rightwing parties mobilized in public files ahead of the ban on voting to launch their latest argumentative attacks on the Broad Front and the PitCnt trade union center, key players in collecting 800,000 signatures in the March 27 referendum.

A poll by the Usina de Percepción Ciudadana, conducted between Friday 18 and Tuesday 22, showed that 39 percent responded that they were convinced they would vote yes and four were more inclined to vote, while 36 voted resolutely for a no and didn’t seven.

The undecided percentage, on the other hand, has gradually fallen in recent weeks, but there are still 10 percent who do not define their vote.

Broad Front President Fernando Pereira commented: “If the outcome is what I think it will be, whatever the outcome, we need to come together to seek a consensus that can enable legislation that more than half support.” . in what he described as a wide table.

jf/hr