Since the first Toledo Pact was signed in 1995, criticism of the pension agreements can be divided into two groups: First, they consider the pact and the agreements as a burden that prevents the adoption of the essential authentic reforms; Others exaggerate the results based on their presentation and affirm that the retirement age has not been delayed, or that the new pensions have been lowered by 25%. In reality, the effects of all the agreed reforms have been positive and relative.
We had been ten years since the last great agreement, and a good number of them maintaining sottovoce measures approved against social agreement. The sustainability factor approved in 2013 was postponed until 2018, and then the government that approved it launched a kick to follow for four more years, but AIReF itself, when it was directed by Minister Escrivá himself, included it among its forecasts, and now the indicator The substitute must fulfill the contingent function of the expenditure assigned to the factor. Setting a complex indicator will therefore be difficult, but in any case not basing everything on the automatic “more life expectancy / lower initial pension” will avoid the temptation to explain the paradox of what would have happened with a factor 13 in application after the covid-19 .
Focusing the effort of the agreement on reducing early retirements by making incentives for delay more attractive and penalizing advances more, is very reasonable. Early retirements still account for almost 40% of the system, and a higher percentage of salaried workers. This agreement should generate a culture that allows the negotiation of pension plans linked to collective bargaining focused on advances, which relieve the system of this tension.
And ensuring that all the reductions in the contribution of the self-employed and agrarian, the childcare permits and other benefits are strictly on the fiscal side of the taxes, leaving the contributions, is a claim that is as old as it is necessary. By the way, that a tax-financed benefit is paid in proportion to the beneficiary’s quota is not strange and encourages the contribution. Other references to issues raised not long ago have come to light, and I think all of us who defended them can be proud.
Things are missing from the agreement. As always. Other issues, such as the revaluation by CPI, were marked by the parliamentary agreement and the unfortunate 0.25%. New agreements will be necessary. But this is an important agreement. Trade unions and businessmen regain a predominant role. The Ministry of Inclusion, Social Security and Migration has managed to ensure that taxes assume expenses that were previously charged by contributions. Pensioners and contributors see how Social Security is territory in agreement. And now there is the next chapter of the book, that the deficit and the debt are bridged thanks to an essential fiscal consolidation. Our pensions are not high, our taxes are low.
Octavio Granado, former Secretary of State for Social Security